Hello, hive mind - with all this talk of whether our projects (even Wiktionary!) should be caught by the UK OSB, I was hoping to crowdsource an answer to the question: who else might be unfortunate bycatch for this ill-scoped "online safety" law? 
I'll set out the key definition below, and hopefully you'll have some ideas.  I'll start the ball rolling with OpenStreetMap and FixMyStreet...

For context: we're hoping to build support for an additional exemption for services "provided for the purpose of indexing, manipulation, discussion and/or making available of content in the public interest, including but not limited to historical, academic, artistic, educational, encyclopaedic, journalistic, and/or statistical content".  It'd be helpful to have other examples of good projects that would benefit from being spared the OSB's requirements, not least all the red tape that it requires!

Scope of the OSB (ignoring parts dedicated to porn sites - and glossing over a couple of smaller details, such as how combination services are treated):

a. Applies to any “User-to-user service” and “search service” that "has links with the UK" (e.g. UK users) and isn't exempt.

b. A U2U service "means an internet service by means of which content that is generated directly on the service by a user of the service, or uploaded to or shared on the service by a user of the service, may be encountered by another user, or other users, of the service (...) it does not matter if content is actually shared with another user or users as long as a service has a functionality that allows such sharing".  It also "does not matter what proportion of content on a service is" UGC.

c. A search service is "an internet service that is, or includes, a search engine", that is run by the provider of that site (rather than just embedding Google Search into your own), but "does not include a service which enables a person to search just one website or database."

Exemptions are set out in Schedule 1.  These include:

1. Services where the UGC is limited to
(but the exemptions above do NOT apply if regulated provider pornographic content is published or displayed on the service)

"Provider content" is "content published on a service by the provider of the service or by a person acting on behalf of the provider (including where the publication of the content is effected or controlled by means of software or an automated tool or algorithm applied by the provider or by a person acting on behalf of the provider)." 
So that would include, say, guest posters on your own blog, or columnists on the Daily Mail website, but is unlikely to include WMF projects (since contributors aren't acting "on behalf of" WMF).

2.  Intranets and search engines that are run internally by businesses.

3. Services provided by UK public bodies or foreign sovereign powers (except for childcare services, which have their own narrower exemption).

4. Certain UK-regulated (e.g. Ofsted-regulated) education/childcare providers.

Thanks in advance!

Phil Bradley-Schmieg (he/him)
Lead Counsel

NOTICE: This message might have confidential or legally privileged information in it. If you have received this message by accident, please delete it and let us know about the mistake. As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical reasons I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer.