Dear All,

As many of you know, we have closely been tracking the dispute between Equustek and Google, which began in Canada but has recently moved to the courts of the United States. Today, we have filed an amicus brief in this case, opposing global takedown orders that threaten free expression and access to knowledge, two central pillars supporting the Wikimedia movement.

In June 2017, the Canadian Supreme Court ordered Google to remove search results leading to products that likely infringed Equustek’s trade secrets. This removal order was for all searches run worldwide. We intervened in that litigation, and earlier this summer published a blog post detailing our concerns about the result. Google has now asked the Northern District of California to declare that enforcement of the Canadian court order would violate the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Initially, they are seeking a preliminary injunction, to stop the order from going into effect.

We filed our amicus brief to help the court understand how global takedown orders violate US and international law, and the effect that such global orders could have on the Wikimedia projects and communities, as well as internet users generally.

The Canadian order encroaches upon the human right to freedom of expression. People have the right to access and impart information through any media, including the internet. In the United States, these fundamental human rights are protected by the First Amendment. Internationally, they are enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other such instruments.

Global takedown orders like the Canadian one in Equustek will impact access to information on the projects, and undermine the mission of the Wikimedia movement. The removal of search results will restrict the global public’s right to find and access information, even on Wikipedia. Additionally, it will make it more difficult for Wikimedia contributors to locate sources for the knowledge they share via the projects. Enforcement of such global orders could also lead to increased ease of global censorship, not just on search engines like Google, but also on sites like the Wikimedia projects, which are dedicated to providing access to information to people around the world.

We asked the court to grant Google’s application for a preliminary injunction, and to be mindful of these broad concerns as it consider the issues going forward. We will keep you updated on the case.

Best,

Jan