Wikipedia legally challenges Online Safety Act

Wikipedia has taken legal action against the UK’s online safety rules, arguing some of its measures could expose the site to “manipulation and vandalism”.

The Wikimedia Foundation – the charity behind the online encyclopaedia – is seeking a judicial review of parts of the Online Safety Act (OSA) which could define the site as a category one service.

Services which fall under this category are subject to the toughest content moderation duties including user verification measures.

Wikimedia Foundation’s lead counsel Phil Bradley-Schmieg said: “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.”

It is thought this could be the first judicial review to be brought against the new online safety laws.

The non-profit organisation claims being classed category one would “undermine the privacy and safety” of its volunteer reviews.

It also argues that it would allow “potentially malicious” users to block content from unverified users, risking “significant amounts of vandalism, disinformation or abuse going unchecked” on the site.

The organisation is not challenging he OSA act as a whole, or the existence of categories, but the rules that decide how a category one service is designated.

Bradley-Schmieg added: “Although the UK government felt this category one duty (which is just one of many) would usefully support police powers “to tackle criminal anonymous abuse” on social media, Wikipedia is not like social media. Wikipedia relies on empowered volunteer users working together to decide what appears on the website.

“This new duty would be exceptionally burdensome (especially for users with no easy access to digital ID). Worse still, it could expose users 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 one duties that could seriously harm Wikipedia.”

The foundation argues the categorisation regulations are “broad and vague” and “have no real connection to actual safety concerns”, including how it defines a popular site which focuses on the number of users that visit a platform rather than how they use it.

Bradley-Schmieg continued: The Wikimedia Foundation must act now to ensure Wikipedia is protected for the future. We are asking for expedited hearings to ensure Wikipedia is protected for the future. Time is short: Under UK rules for judicial review, the Categorisation Regulations must be challenged rapidly. Ofcom is already demanding that we provide the information it needs to make a preliminary category one assessment for Wikipedia. It is in the interest of UK society for laws that threaten human rights to be challenged as early as possible.