I have to say that I do not love the now-ongoing stream of exceptions for “online
encyclopedias”. I understand why it’s happening but I wish we had, at the least, standard
template language that we felt comfortable covered ourselves, IA, arxiv, and libraries
(there’s probably a broader set I’m not even thinking about right now), and did not cover
ourselves as such a special snowflake. That route does not seem stable in the long run,
and isolates us from the people who should be our allies.
(I realize this particularly example also says ‘not for profit educational and scientific
repositories’ but if we’re confident in that language, we should seek shelter in that
language, and seek to bolster it, not have a separate carveout for ourselves. If we’re not
confident (say, because “repositories” is not strong enough) we should seek to strengthen
it.)
On May 31, 2023 at 8:45 AM -0700, Dimi Dimitrov <dimi(a)wikimedia.be>be>, wrote:
Salut la liste !
This month we were active on addressing age-verification requirements for online
platforms and talking about liability for free software. We also got some good news on
open access.
=== Age-Verification ===
France: The French legislature is discussing a law [1] that would require online
platforms, defined as “social networks”, to check their users’ age before allowing them to
access the service. The proposed definitions would cover Wikipedia and its sister
projects. For Wikimedia projects it would be more than just a nuisance to age-gate
content. Most of the proposed systems would require gathering user data or working with
third parties who do so. It would also decrease the availability and accessibility of our
projects.
—
Wikimédia France reached out to Senators, who last week debated and voted on the
proposal. An amendment was tabled that excludes “not for profit online encyclopaedias and
not for profit educational and scientific repositories”. [2] It was supported by the
rapporteur, the French government (the Minister of Digital Transition and
Telecommunications was present) and Senators from the the left, right and centrist groups.
It was adopted by a solid majority. We have a video of the short exchange. [3]
—
UK: France is not the only country where mandatory age-gating provisions for online
platforms are currently being considered. The UK’s Online Safety Bill would introduce such
requirements. Wikimedia UK and the Wikimedia Foundation are working intensively on
advocating for various amendments to the law. [4]
—
Brussels: The topic is also being considered at the EU level. The Digital Services Act
has a provision that requires very large online services to protect minors, but leaves it
(for now) largely up to the platforms how they want to achieve this.
—
Another process that is expected to start in Brussels is a “special group on the EU Code
of conduct on age-appropriate design” [5], which Wikimedia Europe has applied to be a
member of. The group is supposed to come up with best practice solutions on several
issues, including age-verification. The chosen participants are expected to be announced
“any day now”.
=== CSAM ===
The proposal to tackle child sexual abuse material online (CSAM) [6] foresees the
possibility of "detection orders" that can be issued by courts or relevant
authorities against providers of "interpersonal communication services" - for
example, messaging apps. This is the most contentious provision in the draft legislation,
as such orders would effectively eliminate end-to-end encrypted communications.
—
Last month, an opinion by the Council Legal Services [7] was leaked that argues that the
proposal would allow generalised access to the content of interpersonal communications and
thus fail to meet the proportionality requirement inherent to fundamental rights.
Meanwhile the European Commission continues to argue (see a note circulated in the Council
on 16 May [8]) that the proposed system of detection orders is proportionate, because
providers would be able to choose between “(i) abandoning effective end-to-end encryption
or (ii) introducing some form of 'back-door' to access encrypted content or (iii)
accessing the content on the device of the user before it is encrypted (so-called
'client-side scanning')."
—
The Wikimedia Foundation has positioned itself on the proposal. [9] Wikimedia already
takes measures with regards to such content on its projects and cooperates with law
enforcement wherever appropriate. While Wikimedia doesn’t operate interpersonal
communication services, we worry about putting an end to secure and private communications
that can’t be read by governments. We also worry that some anti-grooming provisions might
end up hurting already marginalised groups.
=== Liability on Free Software ===
The Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) sets out cybersecurity requirements for a range of
software products placed on the EU market. The instrument of choice is to impose liability
on developers and deployers of software. Our main worry is how the new obligations would
hinder developers, especially volunteers, of free software. We are coordinating our
position [10] and actions with the FSFE and EDRi.
—
The Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) committee in the European Parliament has the
lead and MEPs have tabled their amendments, which will now be discussed in the coming
weeks (see Documentation Gateway in [11]). The good news is that most political groups are
thinking about the specific needs of free software. The challenge is that the lawmakers,
including the ones in Council, seem to be lacking a coherent vision of what a liability
system should look like. We appear to be stuck considering patches and carve-outs. We are
now going through an initial assessment of amendments [12] and will coordinate with our
allies before contacting lawmakers.
=== Open Access ===
Good news on Open Access! Under the Swedish Presidency, the Competitiveness Council
adopted conclusions on the ‘high quality, transparent, open, trustworthy and equitable
scholarly publishing’, calling for immediate and unrestricted open access to be the norm
in publishing research involving public funds. [13] The Council calls on the European
Commission and Member States to support policies towards a scholarly publishing model that
is not-for-profit, open access and multi-format, with no costs for authors or readers.
(H/T to C4C)
===
[1]https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/16/textes/l16b0739_proposition-loi
[2]https://www.senat.fr/amendements/2022-2023/588/Amdt_16.html
[
3]https://twitter.com/juliettedlrx/status/1661280743362789379
[
4]https://diff.wikimedia.org/2023/05/11/good-intentions-bad-effects-wikimed…
[5]https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/apply-become-member-commission-special-group-eu-code-conduct-age-appropriate-design?pk_source=ec_newsroom&pk_medium=email&pk_campaign=Shaping%20Europe%27s%20Digital%20Future%20website%20updates
[6]https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM%3A2022%3A209%3AFIN
[
7]https://www.statewatch.org/media/3901/eu-council-cls-opinion-csam-proposa…
[
8]https://www.statewatch.org/media/3900/eu-com-csam-regulation-proportional…
[9]https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12726-Fighting-child-sexual-abuse-detection-removal-and-reporting-of-illegal-content-online/F3338612_en
[10]https://wikimedia.brussels/who-should-be-liable-for-free-software/
[11]https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/ficheprocedure.do?reference=2022/0272(COD)&l=en
[
12]https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-9G5h-PYFgtzriuPtqgnRboe_IrDuH16…
[13]https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-8827-2023-INIT/en/pdf
Wikimedia Europe ivzw
_______________________________________________
Publicpolicy mailing list -- publicpolicy(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to publicpolicy-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org