
Github may block content if they receive a valid request from Roskomnadzor - arpa
https://github.com/github/roskomnadzor
======
ivan_gammel
I would really like to see GitHub ignoring such idiotic requests. As Russian
citizen, I'd rather pay for VPN to ensure global freedom of speech, than see
how our governments test boundaries of lawful and sensible censorship.

~~~
aikah
>I'd rather pay for VPN to ensure global freedom of speech,

You using a VPN wont change russian laws.That's the issue.

I'm french and piratebay is on its way to be blocked at the ISP level here. Me
getting a VPN will not change the fact that this shouldnt happen and that
french people need to do something to change these insane laws.

Granted its tougher to go against russian politicians and lawmakers that
french ones. But you're not getting more freedom of speech and information
with a VPN,neither do I.

I've been in Russia numerous times , and frankly I have hard time
understanding what's going on there today. I think Putin genuinely thinks that
without him Russia is doomed or something,which is a mistake.Russia can only
survive if its politicians have faith in Russia's institutions, It's not about
this or that guy,or it's just another dictatorship.

~~~
javert
Stealing intellectual property is entirely different from censorship, and I'm
disappointed to see these two things being lumped together here.

~~~
teamhappy
> Stealing intellectual property is entirely different from censorship, and
> I'm disappointed to see these two things being lumped together here.

The Pirate Bay is entirely different from stealing intellectual property, and
I'm disappointed to see these two things being lumped together here.

Also, I'd be careful throwing the word "censorship" around. What Roskomnadzor
is doing here isn't terribly different from DMCA takedown notices or
governments "censoring" documented child abuse.

~~~
tonyedgecombe
>>The Pirate Bay is entirely different from stealing intellectual property

As someone who has their intellectual property shared by The Pirate Bay I
disagree.

~~~
mateuszf
People being stabbed in dark alleys is not a good argument for banning knives.

~~~
touristtam
However this is how some current regulation are enacted or confirmed: The
Kinder Egg is still not legal to import or to possess in US to the best of my
knowledge (see
[http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cms_ia/importalert_107.html](http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cms_ia/importalert_107.html))

~~~
tlrobinson
That doesn't make it right. There have been something like 6 Kinder egg
related deaths in the last 20 years [1], versus 1.5 BILLION of them sold every
year [2]. Meanwhile, thousands of people die each year from choking on normal
food that doesn't contain plastic objects.

[1]
[http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/a/15909](http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/a/15909)

[2] [http://kinderbrands.com.au/company/](http://kinderbrands.com.au/company/)

~~~
touristtam
I am not arguing this is right. I am just pointing out this is entirely
possible. In fact I would tend to agree with you. Tobacco is a proven bad
drug, and it hasn't been made illegal. There are obviously other parameters to
take into account but still.

------
elementai
Let me clarify a bit, I'm a former employee of russian telecom operator.

Almost everyone can file a complaint. Roskomnadzor's experts decide if it's
valid (no court order is needed) then sends notice, and a site's owner has 3
days to comply.

Telecom operator doesn't have to block entire site, only the offending
content. But, as you know it's not always possible due to, you know, https or
absence of DPI hardware.

And almost all, I think, who filed complaints, tried to show the absurdity of
the situation.

It's the essence of situation in Russia, government tries to do some "good",
but even then it does it mostly horribly wrong. Incompetence is everywhere
empowered by the fact that those incompetent people are here to stay.

------
ge0rg
tl;dr: Russian law enforcement required GitHub to block certain content in
Russia. GitHub has complied and put up a list of the blocked URLs in this
repo.

From a short look at the linked/blocked documents, all of them are suicide
instructions written in Russian.

~~~
cpks
That actually doesn't seem unreasonable to prohibit...

~~~
ge0rg
I am not so sure about it. Blocking/prohibiting information will only lead to
increased interest, and it will never be possible to block all instances of
that information.

A far superior approach would be better social care for people who might
commit suicide, but that would cost money and effort, as opposed to a symbolic
act of prohibition.

Besides, Internet filters always start with the really evil things, like
suicide instructions or child pornography, and once established they are
slowly expanded to cover terrorism, homosexual pornography, regular
pornography, copyright infringement and finally political opposition. You
really do not want to go down that slippery slope.

One example of this is the UK porn filter which is now also used to block
jihad propaganda: [http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/nov/14/uk-isps-
to...](http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/nov/14/uk-isps-to-introduce-
jihadi-and-terror-content-reporting-button)

~~~
vidarh
> One example of this is the UK porn filter which is now also used to block
> jihad propaganda

The article does not support your claim.

EDIT: To clarify, as per the reply I gave further down: There is no country
wide "UK porn filter". There are voluntary filters put in place by each of the
largest providers that are wildly inconsistent in what they block, and wildly
ineffective.

Most of the filtering is also opt-in or opt-out for most of these providers,
mostly apart from blocks targeting child porn.

Outside of the top 5-6 providers, many smaller providers don't filter at all.

~~~
dsp1234
_They have also agreed to ensure that terrorist and extremist material is
captured by their filters to prevent children and young people coming across
radicalising material._

~~~
vidarh
The point being there is no single government mandated "UK porn filter". Each
of the biggest ISPs have individual filters. Many of the smaller ISPs don't
have filters.

EDIT: Maybe whoever downvoted might care to explain why? The comment is
factual. There is no legally mandated filtering across the board in the UK.
The only legally mandated filtering is a small set of specific court orders
targeting a group of the largest ISPs, requiring them to filter specific sites
(Pirate Bay being the main target).

~~~
ge0rg
The point made originally was that Internet filtering is bad for society. The
fact that there is not a single mandated filter but a set of different(?)
filters at the major ISPs, which do not even have a legal basis, is just
making the situation worse for end users. While I admit that my original
wording was misleading, I can not see how the enacted back-and-forth
contributes to the discussion.

From the media coverage of the "UK porn filter" that I followed, the
government said they would make a law to require filtering, then the ISPs
jumped on it and implemented their filtering systems, and then the proposed
laws failed / stalled.

I do not know enough about the UK ISP landscape to be able to determine if all
users of the major ISPs can switch to a non-filtering one, and at what
additional expense.

~~~
vidarh
> From the media coverage of the "UK porn filter" that I followed, the
> government said they would make a law to require filtering, then the ISPs
> jumped on it and implemented their filtering systems, and then the proposed
> laws failed / stalled.

That's not quite how it went. The government hinted that it might do so
_unless_ the ISPs implemented filters that people had to ask to opt-out of.

The ISPs jumped on adding a filtering choice for users in the form of a
checkbox when they sign on. Something many of them had before. Some providers
- notably the mobile providers - have defaulted to opt-out (since long before
the government interference, on the basis that e.g. pay as you go sims can
easily be obtained without providing id, and as a result they don't know if
their subscribers are over 18), while most regular ISPs default to opt-in.

The government subsequently then did _not_ propose any law, and issued
triumphant press releases about protecting children, after Camerons advisers
had been pleading with ISPs to at least make the checkboxes default to ticked.
Largely the result was that they got mocked for not actually achieving any
changes that made a difference to anything at all.

All the largest ISPs still filters child porn regardless of subscriber choice,
but that's the only thing you're not able to turn off. Even that filtering is
not covering nearly all ISPs.

------
tokenizerrr
This is odd. How come when russia requests a block it only gets blocked for
russians, but when america requests a block (DMCA) it gets blocked for
everyone worldwide?

~~~
stemc43
Odd? Image you're a Github. There are thousands of paying accounts in Russia
and also a zillion Russians contributing to open-source projects.

Now imagine all these people now have no access and start sending emails
asking why their paid accounts now aren't working? Russian devs working on
tight schedule, forereigners working in Russia, subs doing contracts for
american companies - now all of them are DENIED.

Would it really be better for github to continue blocking all those innocent
people because of a clearly a set-up type suicide-notes post?

~~~
tokenizerrr
That wasn't my point at all. What I meant: I, as an European, notice content
is blocked for me every time America requests a block on GitHub. Now I hear
about Russia request a block on content, and it seems that only Russians are
blocked but I am not. This caused me to wonder why America got to decide what
everyone in the world can access, yet Russia only gets to decide for their own
country.

The other replies to my comment probably got it right, with GitHub being based
in the US.

------
B5geek
This is where I really don't understand the concept of trying to force your
law/will/idea(ls) on other people.

-Today I posted an image of an apple on my web-page.

-The city in the next town over has decided that images of apples are bad/wrong/evil and has passed a law banning the display of apples.

-The city that I live in gets an angry letter from the other city upset about the portrayal of apples and the wanton disregard for their laws.

Why oh why can't we live in a world where the concept of "If this material is
illegal in your country, you shouldn't be looking at it." or "Be aware of laws
that pertain to you and respect them or change them if you disagree."

~~~
_almosnow
> This is where I really don't understand the concept of trying to force your
> law/will/idea(ls) on other people.

You should have wrote: "on other people that live under the same legal
jurisdiction".

Your attitude towards the law is a real problematic attitude that is currently
more common in this 'generation' (generation not referring exactly to people
of a certain age, but more as people living in a certain time). Since we have
internet now and there are many movements that promote 'freedom' in all of
their possible interpretations, many people find it easy to go over the top
and start demanding things like "Be aware of laws that pertain to you and
respect them _or change them if you disagree_".

You guys should take time to understand what law is and why is it good for it
to exist, and also, why you should respect the jurisdiction pertaining to
other regions or other people (EVEN IF YOU DISAGREE WITH IT). If the majority
of citizens in this world understood this really simple civical principle,
most of the current problems with the world would be nonexistant.

~~~
brownbat
> why you should respect the jurisdiction pertaining to other regions

Some of us highly value open debate and discussion. Perhaps because it's a
core value in some cultures around the world, but maybe that's overly
romantic. I suspect many of us have just read Milton's Areopagitica [1] or
Mill [2], and have yet to hear any convincing refutations.[3]

So those of us who recognize the value of open sharing of ideas will chafe at
any suggestion that ideas are best refuted with suppression.

Others in the world don't share these views.

So we're left with a dilemma that cannot be resolved through mutual respect.
You can't both openly debate controversial topics and be silent about them.
There's no middle ground. There's no "respecting others beliefs" on this.
These are strictly incompatible views on the world, on what information I'm
allowed to discuss with my neighbor.

I don't believe any government should have the power of thought control, so I
reject the attempt of (especially foreign governments) telling me what I can
or cannot discuss with their citizens. I respect the people around the world,
but I cannot always respect their laws.

[1] [http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/608](http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/608)
[2] [http://blog.supplysideliberal.com/post/58569584868/john-
stua...](http://blog.supplysideliberal.com/post/58569584868/john-stuart-mills-
brief-for-freedom-of-speech) [3] Unsurprisingly. How could anyone seriously
argue against open discussion and debate while discussing and debating the
ideas involved? It's inherently contradictory. Or, those in favor of
suppressing speech should first lead by example.

------
GuiA
_> "Although, we may not always agree with the choices the Russian government
has made, we respect the country's sovereignty and recognize that Russians may
have different cultural sensitivities"_

GitHub has a right to do whatever they want with their product; I don't really
care. But this sort of double speak is infuriating. Calling "cultural
sensitivities" the expressions of an authoritatian government that
systematically persecutes its citizens is a major "fuck you" to all Russians.

~~~
DominikR
The issue here are the suicide instructions written in Russian language so it
definitely is about "cultural sensitivities" and not about persecution of
civilians by an authoritarian government.

Just because it is okay in your or my culture to distribute such content
doesn't mean it is everywhere else - nor that it should be as long as laws
reflect the will of the people.

Even in US there are topics that will get you into real trouble, not just your
page censored. For example: Try creating a blog where you instruct your
readers on how to build an explosive belt or bombs. Maybe combine it with
religious fundamentalist rhetoric. You'd probably even end up in jail for
that.

~~~
maxerickson
Would there be consequences for merely providing information?

[http://www.amazon.com/Improvised-Munitions-Handbook-
Departme...](http://www.amazon.com/Improvised-Munitions-Handbook-Department-
Army/dp/1619493969)

~~~
DominikR
It's always a matter of the type of content you distribute and the reach you
have.

Take for example Anwar al-Awlaki. He was a US citizen and his content was
extremist religious views that he distributed via Internet. Without a trial or
conviction he was killed by a drone strike for that, as was his 16 year old
son in a second drone strike.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-
Awlaki](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki)

------
sofaking
What is really fun (or stupid), those "suicide guides" were deliberately
created for trolling roskompozor.

------
blfr
I can view it[1] so it's blocked for Russian users only, yes?

[1]
[https://raw.githubusercontent.com/stevebest/suicide/master/s...](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/stevebest/suicide/master/suicide.md)

~~~
mlvljr
Looks like

------
wildchild
All these suicide manuals -- trolling. Someone trolled github by submitting
suicidal texts in order to get it blocked, because morons from roskomnadzor
will block such sites immediately without judgement and investigation.

~~~
kovrik
Which makes this law much more stupid.

You can virtually block ANY website in Russia by posting prohibited text or
picture (as guest user, for example).

Also, note that NO court decision required. Sites blocked imemdiately
(almost).

------
homakov
I'm Russian and I don't support it at all. Github is losing its face

~~~
danabramov
I was under impression you don't work from Russia most of the time these days.
Pardon me if I'm wrong.

I'd rather have no problems accessing Github without VPN than worry about
Github saving its face in this situation.

~~~
homakov
I don't work from Russia and I want Github to be blocked in Russia.

~~~
danabramov
How would that be helpful to anyone?

~~~
homakov
Russia is doomed to fail and I want it to happen as soon as possible, to have
a probably better country

------
eps
If I were to put my tinfoil hat on, these repos sure look like an attempt to
force the Russian supervisory agency into issuing takedown notices and
prompting friction with GitHub. There are a lot of stupid laws and I'd say GH
found a very simple and unbtrusive way of dealing with one of them.

~~~
icebraining
Forcing? Weren't they already sending takedown notices?

Besides, this is how GH deals with all its requests (e.g. DMCA:
[https://github.com/github/dmca](https://github.com/github/dmca)).

------
vassilevsky
Thanks GitHub. I can turn off FrootVPN now.

~~~
Miner_anonym
Blocking any website is foolishy. Every sansible user knows about VPN. I use
[https://privatoria.net/](https://privatoria.net/) and have no problems.
Moreover VPN helps me in developing, as i need static IP to get access to
different services from different places like office, home or cafe.

~~~
vassilevsky
Those whom the government wants to protect luckily don't know about VPN.

------
emilburzo
Reminds me of thepiratebay legal threats section:
[http://thepiratebay.se/legal](http://thepiratebay.se/legal)

~~~
arpa
If only! But international free speech is a non-issue...

------
zo1
@Mods: Please change the title as it has a typo, the Russian entity referred
to is spelled "Roskomnadzor", not "Roskompazor"

~~~
ge0rg
This looks like a pun by the submitter, exchanging "надзор"
(supervision/monitoring) with "позор" (shame).

~~~
arpa
Can confirm, source: i am the OP.

------
beaknit
Do you think it occurs to the average russian citizen that their country
resembles Germany in the 1930's?

------
tomjen3
So let me get this right: Github, an american company, bows down to threads by
a russian company, about russian law, to censor american peoples access?

How the hell is this not a much bigger story?

~~~
philtar
Censor Russian people's access.

------
smikhanov
Note that as opposed to repositories infringing copyright (those they get DMCA
takedown notices for), the repository itself is not blocked, at least from the
UK.

------
Grue3
Fuck Github for complying with those requests. This is censorship, they don't
have to bend over to accomodate it.

------
mathetic
I like their attitude. They are complying with Russian government's requests
while creating Streisand effect.

------
viach
We have distributed version control system, now looks like it's time to build
decentralised package manager.

------
rmc
I wonder if it's legal for Russia to block LGBT topics. I presume GitHub will
censor that too.

------
colinbartlett
So how long until it's blocked again because of one of the 100 or so forks?

------
mlvljr
Reminds of:

[http://sourceforge.net/blog/clarifying-sourceforgenets-
denia...](http://sourceforge.net/blog/clarifying-sourceforgenets-denial-of-
site-access-for-certain-persons-in-accordance-with-us-law/)

[http://sourceforge.net/blog/clarifying-sourceforgenets-
denia...](http://sourceforge.net/blog/clarifying-sourceforgenets-denial-of-
site-access-for-certain-persons-in-accordance-with-us-law/)

------
mlvljr
Hehe, works again here! (was in and out for me)

------
tomcam
So Github banned Brendan Eich who was so mild in his beliefs they were unknown
for years after he contributed to a principled cause. However, they welcome
the Russian Federation, which has thrown thousands of people into gulags,
taken over media outlets, and has rolled over US allies with impunity.

~~~
jmcqk6
> Github banned Brendan Eich

What in the world are you talking about? A google search shows nothing, but
this. [https://github.com/BrendanEich](https://github.com/BrendanEich)

~~~
tomcam
I was totally wrong. See above.

