Owners of film websites attracting over 100,000 daily users may soon be required to remove content deemed by the Ministry of Culture as «discrediting traditional Russian spiritual and moral values.» This initiative faces challenges as the concept of «traditional spiritual and moral values» remains undefined in current legislation.
The State Duma has recommended adopting amendments that would mandate online cinemas, websites, and social media platforms to block content that undermines traditional values. The Committee on Information Policy has refined these amendments for a second reading, integrating new regulations applicable to both general user accounts and film streaming platforms. Anton Gorelkin, First Deputy Chairman of the relevant State Duma committee, authored these proposed changes.
Similar to large online cinemas, owners of film websites with a daily audience exceeding 100,000 users would be compelled to delete works that the Ministry of Culture identifies as «discrediting traditional Russian spiritual and moral values,» or those for which the ministry has refused to issue distribution certificates. This legislation would also extend to social media platforms with over half a million daily users, obliging them to block «discrediting materials» on personal user pages.
However, the very notion of discrediting traditional values lacks a clear legal definition. Fyodor Kravchenko, managing partner of the Collegium of Media Lawyers, explains:
“Currently, the concept of ‘value,’ or ‘moral and spiritual value,’ as used in this bill, is undefined not only in laws but also in any subordinate acts or judicial practice. It can be interpreted excessively broadly. I would even say, unacceptably broadly, because these vague concepts restrict one of the key human rights: the right to receive and disseminate information. Furthermore, the concept of ‘traditional’ concerning values is extremely blurred. What might be traditional for centuries in some societal strata could have only recently become traditional in others. Therefore, the notion of traditionality would have to be endlessly clarified and defined, ultimately making it impossible.”
As previously reported by Business FM, amendments passed in the first reading stipulated that films and series lacking distribution certificates could not remain in the libraries of legal online cinemas. Historically, distribution certificates primarily pertained to offline screenings and broadcasts on federal channels, and for series, they were rarely, if ever, issued.
Kinopoisk, a major Russian online cinema, estimated that if the law were adopted in its current form, the service would have to remove 90% of its content. Officials would then need years to review all these films and series to decide on issuing certificates. It is crucial to remember that platforms pre-negotiate copyright and royalty agreements during project development, which forms the basis of their revenue. Haphazard content blocking would inflict significant financial damage on the business.
Nevertheless, Sergey Boyarsky, head of the State Duma’s Committee on Information Policy, informed Business FM that content already uploaded to platforms would not be re-evaluated for distribution certificates. According to him, the amendments would only apply to newly uploaded content. However, experts reviewing the latest amendment drafts did not find such a clarification. The text states that owners of audiovisual services are obligated to comply with the requirement to not distribute films without a distribution certificate. The definition of «film screening» is also clarified to include distribution via an audiovisual service.
Additionally, the first reading of the amendments included a provision allowing the Ministry of Culture to refuse issuing a distribution certificate if the content negates traditional values.
Russian cinema already walks a tightrope. Safely producing only fairy tales seems to be the only option. Films addressing issues like domestic violence, for instance, are currently not receiving distribution certificates, notes Alexander Golubchikov, editor-in-chief of Zoomfilm portal:
“No one knows what hidden pitfalls they might encounter. Everyone is making fairy tales; any content can be ostracized. What could be the losses for online cinemas? They will have to carefully read emails, receive directives, and apparently, clean up their catalogs or edit certain projects. Currently, many projects have already been removed from online cinema libraries. They were either re-edited, as was done with ‘Clinic of Happiness,’ where the motives of some key characters were re-dubbed and re-edited to remove any seditious elements, or they were completely deleted.”
The second reading of the bill, including these amendments, is anticipated for Tuesday, July 22.
