Latest news with #PhilBradley-Schmieg
Business Mayor
08-05-2025
- Business Mayor
Wikipedia challenging UK law it says exposes it to ‘manipulation and vandalism'
The charity that hosts Wikipedia is challenging the UK's online safety legislation in the high court, saying some of its regulations would expose the site to 'manipulation and vandalism'. In what could be the first judicial review related to the Online Safety Act, Wikimedia Foundation claims it is at risk of being subjected to the act's toughest category 1 duties, which impose additional requirements on the biggest sites and apps. The foundation said if category 1 duties were imposed on it, the safety and privacy of Wikipedia's army of volunteer editors would be undermined, its entries could be manipulated and vandalised, and resources would be diverted from protecting and improving the site. Announcing that it was seeking a judicial review of the categorisation regulations, the foundation's lead counsel, Phil Bradley-Schmieg, said: 'We are taking action now to protect Wikipedia's volunteer users, as well as the global accessibility and integrity of free knowledge.' The foundation said it was not challenging the act as a whole, nor the existence of the requirements themselves, but the rules that decide how a category 1 platform is designated. Those rules were set in secondary legislation by the technology secretary, Peter Kyle. The foundation is challenging Kyle's decision to proceed with that statutory instrument, via a judicial review, where a judge reviews the legality of a decision made by a public body, at the high court of England and Wales. Under an interpretation of one of the category 1 duties, the foundation said, if it chose not to verify Wikipedia users and editors, it would have to allow anonymous users to block other posters from fixing or removing any content, under the act's measures to tackle online trolls. Read More Community Fibre faces internet outage across London - As a consequence, thousands of volunteer editors on the site would need to undergo identity verification, which breaches the foundation's commitment to collecting minimal data about readers and contributors. Punishments for breaching the act include fines of either £18m or 10% of a company's global turnover and, in extreme cases, access to a service being blocked in the UK. Bradley-Schmieg said volunteer communities working in more than 300 languages could be exposed to 'data breaches, stalking, vexatious lawsuits or even imprisonment by authoritarian regimes'. 'Privacy is central to how we keep users safe and empowered. Designed for social media, this is just one of several category 1 duties that could seriously harm Wikipedia,' he said. The foundation argues that the definitions of a category 1 service are too broad and vague, including: having an algorithm that effects what content people view; having content sharing or viewing features; and what defines a 'popular' site, which focuses on how many users visit a platform and not how they use it. 'We regret that circumstances have forced us to seek judicial review of the OSA's categorisation regulations,' said Bradley-Schmieg. 'Given that the OSA intends to make the UK a safer place to be online, it is particularly unfortunate that we must now defend the privacy and safety of Wikipedia's volunteer editors from flawed legislation.' A UK government spokesperson said: 'We are committed to implementing the Online Safety Act to create a safer online world for everyone. We cannot comment on ongoing legal proceedings.'
Engadget
08-05-2025
- Engadget
Wikipedia's owner challenges categorization rules under UK's Online Safety Act
Wikimedia says it shouldn't be held to the same standard as Facebook or X. The Wikimedia Foundation, hosts of the free online encyclopedia Wikipedia , is challenging an aspect of the United Kingdom's Online Safety Act (OSA). The law aims to protect users from harmful online content by imposing restrictions and fines on large internet platforms such as social media companies. While the law was originally passed in 2023, enforcement and categorization of companies subject to the law are only taking shape now . The law sorts online platforms into categories that are then met with varying levels of restrictions and enforcement. Wikimedia is specifically challenging the 'categorisation regulations' under the law, arguing that Ofcom, the UK's communications regulator, is using a flawed and vague system of metrics to judge what category a platform falls into. ADVERTISEMENT Advertisement Under the current definition , metrics like number of UK users and the ability to forward or share content make it more likely that Wikipedia would be considered a higher-risk 'Category 1' platform. This would put Wikipedia in the same bucket as Facebook, X, YouTube and other enormous social platforms. The Wikimedia Foundation's lead counsel Phil Bradley-Schmieg shared in a blog post that the foundation had been working with UK regulators for years in an attempt to clarify the rules in a manner the foundation felt would be more fair. Platforms that are recognized as Category 1 are held to more stringent requirements governing how quickly they remove harmful content, ensuring proper age verification , preventing cyberbullying and more. The Wikimedia Foundation is arguing that Wikipedia should not be lumped into Category 1, as it is a nonprofit, ad-free and mostly volunteer-operated service. In another blog post , the Wikimedia Foundation lays out its concerns, saying that these restrictions 'would be a substantial challenge to our resources to meet the strict reporting and compliance obligations,' and that the fines threatened by Category 1 classification could lead to 'disempowering users who wish to keep their identity private.'
