Defects in the implementation of the protection of rights violated in the information space

Abstract

The article is devoted to the identification and search for ways to resolve the discreteness of the law governing relations in the information space, and its implementation. System-structural analysis, the logical method made it possible to identify ways to resolve such discreteness. It can be overcome by using the analogy of law, which makes it possible to ensure the functioning of the legal system in the absence of the necessary norm-regulator. The elimination of discreteness involves making the necessary changes to the current legislation. As examples of the analyzed discreteness of law, defects in legislation and the implementation of the following rights in the information space are considered: the right to protect honor, dignity and business reputation and the right to be forgotten. In the first case, we are talking about the impossibility of initiating the restriction of access to the source in which the information recognized by the court as discrediting and unreliable was placed, if such a decision was made in the manner of a special proceeding. It is concluded that overcoming this defect is possible in two ways: the first is the application of the right to be forgotten, the second is the statement of the requirement to recognize the source that disseminated false defamatory information to be included in a single automated information system. It is concluded that overcoming a defect is a temporary and forced measure, and the ultimate goal of the legislator is to eliminate the defect. Two ways to eliminate the described defect are proposed. First: the introduction of mandatory registration of an information source, if we are talking about a resource on the Internet, then - its national domain, in domestic specialized systems. Second: elimination of the defect by amending article 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and clause 5 of article 15.1 of the Federal Law "On Information, Information Technologies and Information Protection". Namely, the inclusion in these articles of a new basis for restricting access to an information source: the entry into force of a judicial act issued in a special proceeding on recognizing the disseminated information as unreliable and discrediting. It was proposed to secure the right to refute widespread information if the court determines that the information gives the reader the impression that the circumstances described in the disputed material actually took place. The second considered defect in the implementation of the right is the lack of uniformity in the interpretation of the “public interest” and, as a result, the lack of uniformity in the practice of applying the right to be forgotten. It is proposed to legislatively formulate the definition of the criterion of "public interest" for the purposes of exercising the right to be forgotten in relation to irrelevant information and information that has lost its significance for the applicant.