Wikipedia operating a company lost a case of displaced by the legal character of parts of the UK online security law on Monday, which was criticized by the establishment of new strict requirements for online sites and controlling freedom of expression.
The Wikimedia Foundation has questioned the rules made by the London High Court in the London High Court, which can be imposed on Wikipedia, according to the Foundation.
The Foundation said that if the Type 1 duties were subject to the duties-the use of the users and cooperatives of Vikipadia would have to be verified as dramatically reduced the number of British users who access the site.
Judge Jeremy Johnson rejected the case on Monday, but the Wikimedia Foundation could present a new competition, if the regulatory agency decides “Wikipedia is a type 1 service”.
He said that “Wikipedia did not give the green light to the Afcoming and Secretary of State to implement a regime that would significantly prevent Wikipedia activities.”
The Wikimedia Foundation said that “we did not provide Wikipedia,” we did not provide immediate legal protection “but welcomed the court's comments that he stressed that he claimed that” the UK and the UK government's responsibility to ensure the safety of Wikipedia. “
The United Kingdom Science, Innovation and Technology Department has welcomed this decision, “This will help you continue our task to implement the Online Security Act to create a safe online world.”
“This will continue to work on our assorted services,” Afgum said.
The Online Security Act, which has been passed by 2023, has been criticized by the social network X earlier this month, which claimed that significant changes in the law are necessary.
Freedom and content creators of the constellations complained that their rules were implemented very wide, resulting in censorship of legal content.
The British government says the law was created to protect children and eliminate illegal content. Technical Secretary Peter Kyle said that those who want to knock her are “hunters”.
