Apple slapped with $93,000 LGBTQ propaganda fine in Russia
A Moscow court on Monday fined US tech giant Apple 7.5 million rubles ($93,000) for violating Russian laws against spreading LGBTQ propaganda.
In April, the company was accused of breaching Part 3 of Article 6.21 of Russia's Administrative Violations Code, which covers online promotion of non-traditional sexual relations and preferences, gender reassignment, and child-free ideology.
In a statement posted on Telegram, court officials said Moscow's Tagansky Court has 'found Apple Distribution International Ltd. guilty of three administrative offences' under Article 6.21 and imposed a fine of over $30,000 for each violation.
The case stems from the distribution of a television series on Apple's streaming platform that included scenes promoting non-traditional sexual relations, RBK business outlet reported, citing statements by Russian media regulator Roskomnadzor.
The hearing was held behind closed doors due to what was described as confidential information related to the company's services and internal communications. No further details were disclosed by the court or the parties involved.
Russia has tightened its laws dealing with LGBTQ propaganda over the past decade. In 2013, the dissemination of related content among minors was banned, with the restrictions broadened to cover adults in 2022. Last year, the country designated the LGBTQ movement as a terrorist organization.
In a separate Monday ruling, the Tagansky Court fined Apple more than $37,000 for failing to delete content deemed illegal under Russian law. The company has faced similar penalties in the past, including a $10,000 fine in January of 2024 for failing to remove Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler's book, 'Mein Kampf,' which is listed as extremist material in Russia, from its Apple Books application.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
3 hours ago
- Russia Today
West waging ‘centuries-old war' against Moscow – Russia's top UN diplomat
Western nations are using Ukraine as their proxy in a longstanding confrontation with Russia, which is deeply rooted in history, Russian Ambassador to the UN Vassily Nebenzia has told RT's Rick Sanchez. In an interview on Sanchez Effect aired on Friday, Nebenzia argued that the conflict 'should be seen in a larger context.' 'They do not care about Ukraine. This is not a war between Russia and Ukraine,' he said. 'Ukraine is a proxy in this war. This is a centuries-old war of the West against Russia, starting with the Polish invasion in the 17th century.' Nebenzia cited Napoleon's invasion of Russia, the 1854-56 Crimean War, Western military intervention during the Russian Civil War, and the invasion by Nazi Germany and its allies in World War II. He stressed that Hitler's army included not only Germans, but also units drawn from allied countries and occupied territories. The Ukrainians and 'their sponsors' in the West sabotaged the 2014-15 Minsk accords, which were aimed at ending the conflict between Kiev and the breakaway Donbass republics, the Russian diplomat said. Former French President Francois Hollande and former German Chancellor Angela Merkel later admitted that the agreement was used by Kiev to buy time and rearm, Nebenzia stated. 'We are not going [to fall] into the same trap once again,' he said. He added that politicians such as former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson similarly helped derail the 2022 peace talks between Russia and Ukraine. Ukraine's European backers were forced to adjust their position, Nebenzia argued, after US President Donald Trump launched efforts to broker peace and Ukrainian troops began losing more ground. 'They changed their rhetoric from 'We should inflict strategic defeat on Russia' to 'Russia should not win in this war.' Now they are advocating for a full, immediate, and unconditional ceasefire, which is testimony that they want to shield and protect their proxy, as they are obviously losing on the battlefield,' he said. Nebenzia added that the resumption of direct Russia-Ukraine negotiations earlier this year provides hope that the conflict will be resolved soon.
Russia Today
9 hours ago
- Russia Today
NATO's spending hike math doesn't add up
NATO expects a military conflict with Russia within the next five years yet plans to raise defense spending to 5% of GDP only by 2035, a timeline that Russian Foreign Ministry official Vladislav Maslennikov pointed out as contradictory during a Valdai Discussion Club session on Friday. At a summit held in The Hague this week, members of the US-led bloc pledged to increase defense spending to 5% of GDP by 2035, citing what they described as the 'long-term threat posed by Russia to Euro-Atlantic security.' US President Donald Trump, who has consistently pressed European allies to take on more of the defense burden, welcomed the deal as a 'monumental win.' Maslennikov, who heads up the ministry's Department for European Cooperation questioned how the bloc justifies a distant spending target while simultaneously anticipating a near-term confrontation. 'It's not just the logic that's flawed — the arithmetic doesn't add up either,' Maslennikov said. 'If the public is being told that Russia is expected to launch an attack by 2030, then why is the European Union only aiming to be fully prepared by 2035? It doesn't make much sense,' he argued. Another challenge NATO faces on defense policy is the lack of a unified stance among member states regarding dialogue with Russia, Maslennikov believes. While some EU nations see engagement as necessary, others advocate for cutting ties with Russia entirely. 'Some want to rule out any possibility of future dialogue with us, while others acknowledge that, sooner or later, constructive engagement will be necessary – after all, geography cannot be changed,' Maslennikov said. According to the diplomat, the so-called 'Russian threat' is a 'highly convenient construct for NATO.' Moscow believes reversing this narrative will be difficult and it has no intention of making the first move toward restoring constructive engagement. 'Much will depend on how our relationship with the United States evolves,' he stressed. Russian President Vladimir Putin dismissed the rhetoric about the threat posed by Russia to NATO as an 'inconceivable lie' used by Western governments to justify tax increases and the diversion of public funds to the military-industrial complex. Speaking at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum last week, Putin warned that this kind of military posturing only escalates global tensions while diverting resources from social and economic needs.
Russia Today
13 hours ago
- Russia Today
Russia's surprising role in the Israel-Iran conflict that you might not know about
During a recent visit to Turkmenistan, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov held talks with his counterparts and addressed students at the Institute of International Relations in Ashgabat. Among the central themes of his remarks was the escalating conflict between Iran and Israel – a confrontation that not only affects global geopolitics but also directly impacts the security dynamics of Central Asia. For Turkmenistan – which shares over 1,100km of border with Iran and has its capital just miles from that border – the growing tension poses serious risks. Beyond humanitarian concerns, the prospect of a wider war could awaken dormant radical networks and destabilize fragile domestic balances. These risks extend beyond Turkmenistan to other southern former Soviet republics that maintain close political and military ties with Russia. Against this backdrop, Lavrov's call for de-escalation and regional stability carried added weight. For Moscow, Iran is not just a partner – it's a pillar in the buffer zone securing Russia's southern flank. Instability in Tehran could ripple across Central Asia, threatening Russia's near-abroad. In January of this year, Russia and Iran signed a comprehensive strategic partnership agreement, institutionalizing bilateral ties and hinting at a future formal alliance. Tellingly, just days after Israeli airstrikes targeted Tehran, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi flew to Moscow, met with President Vladimir Putin, and held talks with Lavrov. He later described the visit as marked by 'complete mutual understanding' and emphasized Russia's support in an interview with the news outlet Al-Araby Al-Jadeed. Russia, along with China and Pakistan, has since pushed a new UN Security Council resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire and a pathway to political settlement. As Russian envoy Vassily Nebenzia noted, the resolution aims to stop further escalation. Yet Moscow has been careful in its public rhetoric. At the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, Putin avoided inflammatory language toward Israel, instead stressing the need for a diplomatic solution acceptable to all sides. This cautious tone reflects Russia's balancing act: deepening ties with Tehran while maintaining working – and in some cases warm – relations with Israel, including in military and humanitarian channels. That dual posture allows Russia to position itself as a potential mediator, should either party seek a negotiated outcome. On June 13, as Israeli airstrikes intensified, Russia quickly condemned the attacks and voiced strong concern about violations of Iranian sovereignty. Putin went further, calling US behavior in the region 'unprovoked aggression.' Moscow's message was clear: it opposed outside military interventions – full stop. Days before Araghchi's trip, Putin publicly revealed that Russia had offered Iran expanded cooperation on air defense systems, an offer Tehran had not pursued. Far from a rebuke, it read as a nudge: if the strategic partnership is real, Iran needs to meet Russia halfway. Moscow remains open to closer defense collaboration, including integrating Iran's air defense into a broader regional security framework. In retrospect, had Tehran taken up the offer earlier, it might have been better prepared to repel the strikes. For Russia, security is measured not in rhetoric, but in results – and it expects its partners to act accordingly. Crucially, the 2025 strategic agreement between Moscow and Tehran does not entail mutual defense obligations. It is not the Russian equivalent of NATO's Article 5, nor does it mandate automatic military assistance. As Putin clarified, the pact reflects political trust and coordination – not a blank check for joint warfare. In fact, the treaty explicitly forbids either side from supporting a third party that launches aggression against the other. Russia has held to that standard – refusing to engage with perceived aggressors, while voicing diplomatic solidarity with Iran and condemning destabilizing actions by the US and Israel. In short, the architecture of the partnership is built on sovereign respect and strategic equilibrium – not entangling commitments. It centers on military-technical cooperation, coordinated diplomacy via BRICS and the SCO, and shared interest in regional stability. But it stops short of dragging Russia into wars that don't pose a direct threat to its national security. One development drew particular attention: just after Araghchi's Kremlin visit, US President Donald Trump abruptly called for a ceasefire and adopted a noticeably softer tone on Iran. With the exception of a few pointed posts on Truth Social, his messaging turned markedly more measured. Prior to his trip to Moscow, Araghchi emphasized in Istanbul that consultations with Russia were 'strategic and not ceremonial.' He made clear that Tehran viewed the partnership as a platform for sensitive security coordination – not just protocol. Whether by coincidence or not, the shift in US rhetoric suggests Moscow's influence may have quietly shaped the trajectory of events. Russia, after all, is one of the few actors with open channels to both Tehran and Tel Aviv. It's entirely plausible that the Kremlin served as a behind-the-scenes intermediary, securing at least a temporary pause in hostilities. Russia remains a calibrated but consequential player in the Middle East. Accusations that Moscow has failed to 'stand by' Iran are speculative and largely unfounded – both politically and legally. Russia offers solidarity, coordination, and leverage – not unconditional support for escalation. And in a region where words matter as much as missiles, a subtle shift in language from Washington – timed to quiet talks in the Kremlin – may say more than any press release. Diplomacy, after all, often moves where cameras don't.
