LONDON, Aug 11 (Reuters) - The operator of Wikipedia on Monday lost a legal challenge to parts of Britain's Online Safety Act, which sets tough new requirements for online platforms and has been criticised for potentially curtailing free speech.
The Wikimedia Foundation took legal action at London's High Court over regulations made under the law, which it said could impose the most stringent category of duties on Wikipedia.
The foundation said if it was subject to so-called Category 1 duties – which would require Wikipedia's users and contributors' identities to be verified – it would need to drastically reduce the number of British users who can access the site.
Judge Jeremy Johnson dismissed its case on Monday, but said the Wikimedia Foundation could bring a further challenge if regulator Ofcom "(impermissibly) concludes that Wikipedia is a Category 1 service”.
He added that his decision "does not give Ofcom and the Secretary of State a green light to implement a regime that would significantly impede Wikipedia's operations".
The Wikimedia Foundation said the ruling "does not provide the immediate legal protections for Wikipedia that we hoped for", but welcomed the court's comments emphasising what it said was "the responsibility of Ofcom and the UK government to ensure Wikipedia is protected".
The Wikimedia Foundation took legal action at London's High Court over regulations made under the law, which it said could impose the most stringent category of duties on Wikipedia.
The foundation said if it was subject to so-called Category 1 duties – which would require Wikipedia's users and contributors' identities to be verified – it would need to drastically reduce the number of British users who can access the site.
Judge Jeremy Johnson dismissed its case on Monday, but said the Wikimedia Foundation could bring a further challenge if regulator Ofcom "(impermissibly) concludes that Wikipedia is a Category 1 service”.
He added that his decision "does not give Ofcom and the Secretary of State a green light to implement a regime that would significantly impede Wikipedia's operations".
The Wikimedia Foundation said the ruling "does not provide the immediate legal protections for Wikipedia that we hoped for", but welcomed the court's comments emphasising what it said was "the responsibility of Ofcom and the UK government to ensure Wikipedia is protected".
