They've started to do so before the law was adjusted

Like Facebook, Twitter and every other forum did? I wonder if there were any consequences if they didn't.

Basically they've taken a step further with censorship of all media not controlled by government which at the time (2014) couldn't been penalized whatsoever.

And what if they hadn't?

"Couldn't be penalized whatsoever" wasn't enough? In broader view, government could start taking hostages like they did with Google last December, but that wouldn't help reaching the goal even a small bit back then since there was no leverage on technical side of things.

> "Couldn't be penalized whatsoever" wasn't enough?

No, I think that's very naive.

No, they just removed all but pro-Putin or state media out of Yandex News. It's just only pro-war Kremlin propaganda now.

> What's the alternative? Open rebellion against the state?

Yes. HTH!

To elaborate: At some stage, that becomes the only acceptable alternative; not doing so is morally culpable.

The world learned that in 1945, two ways:

1) "I was only following orders" was deemed not a valid excuse at the Nürnberg trials; not refusing orders like that is complicity; and

2) Germany as a whole was de-Nazified. Just like Russia needs to be now. (But more thoroughly: in Germany's case, it was an aberration of a dozen years; in Russia's, it's a millennium of unbroken history of totalitarianism.)

Too bad the world seems to have forgotten those lessons since then.