Hello!

This month’s read is quite heavy on child protection, but we also have AI/copyright and geo-blocking for you. As an overall tendency, we can observe that the Commission is looking into simplification ideas, while the European Parliament is dealing with non-legislative debates.

Dimi & Michele

=== Child Protection - Age Verification ===

The European Commission is working on its guidelines on the protection of minors under the Digital Services Act. They are expected in the coming weeks. The Wikimedia Foundation has provided public feedback https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14352-Protection-of-minors-guidelines/F3496424_en. As different platforms and member states are currently working on various aspects of this, fragmentation or even contradicting rules are a risk. It is expected that the Commission will determine some types of content are too harmful for children and hence require age checks. How they draw the line and whether guidelines can stop fragmentation remain open questions.

—

Meanwhile the European Parliament is working on an own-initiative report https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/da/procedure-file?reference=2022/2027(INI) on the topic. The work is led by the Internal Market and Consumer Protection committee (IMCO). Own-initiative reports don’t carry legislative weight and are often a long list of general recommendations. However, the process helps map interested members and their respective positions. It is also a good pretext for reaching out. The committee is planning a hearing on 7 April. The report is expected on 25-26 June.

—

Member States are really jockeying each other on this. Greece has presented a “kids wallet” with age verification and parental control functions. Spain, Germany and France are working on their own age verification solutions. Other countries, especially the Nordics, are also working on various initiatives. This all builds pressure on the European Commission to deliver both clear rules and a universal technical solution.

—

On the side of the platforms there are several notable insights to share. Almost everyone is rolling out some sort of either parental control or other child protection initiatives. Almost everyone is worried that we might end up with many different rules and systems across the continent. One thing where stakeholders disagree is on what level age checks should be performed: On the OS/device level or on the app level?

—

Why it matters for Wikimedia:We would not be OK if age verification for access to Wikimedia projects was mandated.

=== Child Protection - CSAM ===

Refresher: The European Commission has years ago proposed an act to combat Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM) https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52022PC0209. The Council still can’t reach one, as member states are deadlocked about whether instant messages should be scanned for abuse material. The parliament has a position which would allow such scanning only for specific accounts and only after a judicial order.

—

The Polish Presidency of the Council has proposed https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/CM-1756-2025-INIT/en/pdf to leave it up to the platforms to decide, in an attempt to break the deadlock. There will be a Council meeting on 8 April to attempt to achieve progress. But the finish line is still far away.

—

Why it matters for Wikimedia: We do care about child protection. And while we don’t offer any interpersonal communication services, we do (both community and WMF) have procedures to check and remove such material. It doesn’t look like our current procedures would be changed by the new legislation, if it ever passes, but we do have an interest nonetheless. The Wikimedia Foundation has also provided public feedback 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 .

=== GDPR Overhaul? ===

It might be getting real: There are ongoing discussions about whether the GDPR needs updates. Commissioner McGrath shared at various events that the Commission is looking at this as part of its digital simplification package. One thing they are focused on is simplifying or removing recordkeeping by small firms and organizations with “fewer than 500 people”. Of course, different people within the Commission have different ideas. Still very much in flux.

—

Simultaneously the European Data Protection Board will look into the “right to be forgotten”. Throughout 2025, 32 data protection authorities in Europe will investigate https://www.edpb.europa.eu/news/news/2025/cef-2025-launch-coordinated-enforcement-right-erasure_en how requests for erasure from data subjects are being handled as part of an initiative to better coordinate processes.

—

Why it matters for Wikimedia: Some GDPR aspects that are relevant to our operations include first party cookies (bots, A/B testing), right to erasure and bureaucratic obligations.

=== Geo-Blocking ===

The Geo-blocking Regulation https://wikimedia.brussels/geo-blocking-audiovisual-content-why-we-need-to-achieve-a-truly-connected-digital-single-market/ was adopted in 2018 and prohibits any forms of discrimination based on customers’ nationality, place of residence or place of establishment within the EU. It however excludes from its scope audiovisual content and copyrighted material. In this regard, there is a review clause that obliges the Commission to evaluate the enlargement of the scope to include copyright-protected works and audiovisual content.

—

The Commission hence opened a call for evidence https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14416-Geo-blocking-Regulation-evaluation_en to gather input from stakeholders. Wikimedia Europe submitted its feedback https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14416-Geo-blocking-Regulation-evaluation/F3526649_en, focusing on why audiovisual services and copyrighted content should be included in the scope.

—

Why it matters for Wikimedia: Some sources that we cite are accessible in one country, but not another (e.g. documentary by a public broadcaster).

=== AI & Copyright ===

In France the Ministry of Culture is hosting a roundtable on Copyright & AI with only collecting societies. Wikimédia France was not amused and published an open letter https://actualitte.com/article/122564/tribunes/discuter-de-l-ia-et-du-droit-d-auteur-sans-les-usagers-ni-les-auteurs, together with like minded organisations, about being included.

—

The European Commission is continuing its work on the Code of Practice https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/ai-code-practice on AI. It is unclear whether this will ever be taken up by large parts of the industry, but regarding copyright we can read that operators should “make reasonable efforts to exclude from their web-crawling Internet domains that make available to the public copyright-infringing content on a commercial scale and have no substantial legitimate uses”.

—

Wikimedia UK has provided feedback to the UK government’s consultation on copyright and AI https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/copyright-and-artificial-intelligence .

—

Why it matters for Wikimedia: Love it, hate it, AI will have an impact on the limits of copyright and will heavily influence future copyright reforms. In the USA the open question is how far fair use goes. In the EU the text and data mining exceptions are being tested in real life.

===END===