: I never thought of distributing
: something that's free as being piracy. Maybe it fits some reasonable
: definition, but I think you'd be hard-pressed to find average people who
: would call it piracy without some added explanation. Explaining that it's
: not actually out yet would probably do the trick.

"Free" is a very vague term alone.
If "Free" comes with context, then anything breaking that context can be considered piracy.
Freeware is generally considered open to all, free for all, distribution anywhere. Especially abandonware.

In this case "Free" is "Free beta for Russia", not "Free for the world!"

You can't just see "free" in a name, and ignore everything else and say "but it was free". Doesn't hold up. On its own, free just means that if you possess it, you aren't expected to provide compensation for it. Are there requirements attached to whether you can possess it?

Of course you could argue whether those requirements are enforceable by law, but if not then you enter into debate about etiquette and ethics in the digital realm, especially across nation borders.

In this case, at the very least, it's definitely unethical to take the 'free Russian beta' and do with it as you will beyond Russia.