Wikipedia Loses UK Court Challenge Over Online Safety Act

The Wikimedia Foundation, which operates Wikipedia, has lost a High Court challenge against parts of the UK’s Online Safety Act. The law introduces strict rules for online platforms, aimed at protecting children and removing illegal content. However, critics argue it could lead to censorship of legal material and curtail freedom of expression. The Wikimedia Foundation’s legal action focused on the possibility of being classified as a “Category 1” service. Such a classification would require identity verification for users and contributors, a step it said would drastically reduce participation and accessibility on Wikipedia.

See also: Colombian Senator Miguel Uribe Dies Months After Campaign Shooting

Judge Jeremy Johnson dismissed the case, noting that Wikimedia could bring another challenge if Ofcom, the UK’s communications regulator, wrongly concludes that Wikipedia falls under Category 1. The Online Safety Act has also faced opposition from other tech firms, including X (formerly Twitter), which has called for significant changes. Free speech advocates have warned that the law’s broad scope risks harming open internet communities and independent creators.

See also: Nvidia and AMD to give U.S. 15% of China chip sales in landmark export deal

The British government maintains that the Online Safety Act is a vital tool for safeguarding children and removing harmful material. Technology Secretary Peter Kyle has argued that those opposing the law are “on the side of predators.” Supporters say the regulations will hold tech companies accountable for online safety, especially in cases of illegal content and exploitation.

Critics, however, claim the law’s provisions could be overreaching, applying the same strict standards to community-driven, nonprofit platforms like Wikipedia as to commercial social media giants. The Wikimedia Foundation insists that Wikipedia’s volunteer-driven model and open editing system depend on anonymity for many contributors, especially in regions where free speech is restricted. If forced to verify all users’ identities, the platform fears it would lose a significant portion of its global editing base, undermining the breadth and diversity of its content.

The court’s ruling keeps the law intact but does not rule out future legal challenges, leaving Ofcom’s eventual classification of Wikipedia as a key point of contention. The outcome will be closely watched by tech companies, free-speech campaigners, and online communities concerned about the future of open and anonymous collaboration on the internet.