- The non -profit group behind Wikipedia has lost its legal dispute against the online security law
- The Wikimedia Foundation opposes the possibility of being subject to the strictest rules
- The High Court of London said that the decision was not a “green light” for OFCOM to implement new rules if they hampered Wikipedia operations
The non -profit organization behind Wikipedia has lost its legal fight against the online security law – but it can always be on the right track to resist compulsory age controls.
On Monday August 11, 2025, the High Court of London rejected the judicial examination that the Wikimedia Foundation published in May to challenge the categorization under the next implementation of the law.
The judge, however, stressed that the decision does not give “ofcom and the secretary of state a green light to implement a regime which would considerably hinder Wikipedia operations”, therefore leaving room for additional legal appeal.
No age checks on Wikipedia – For the moment
From July 25, 2025, all online platforms display only or potentially harmful materials are necessary to check the age of their users before allowing them to access such content.
In addition to the most obvious names, social media applications such as Reddit, X or Bluesky, dating applications such as Grindr, and even the music giant Streaming Spotify are among the websites that you may not expect to have been assigned by age verification.
Indeed, under the last implementation of the online security law, these platforms enter category 1 of the scope of the law. This categorization obliges providers to follow the strictest rules, including an obligation of diligence to protect minors from the so-called “legal but harmful content”.
This is exactly what Wikipedia worries – and tried to challenge in court. The group argued, in fact, that forcing its volunteer contributors to the United Kingdom to be checked would undermine their rights to privacy, security, freedom of expression and the association.
Commenting on Monday’s decision, Wikimedia Foundation said: “Although the decision does not provide immediate legal protections for Wikipedia that we hoped, the court’s decision highlighted the OFCOM and the British government to ensure that Wikipedia is protected in the implementation of the ASA.”
Could the Wikipedia affair create a previous one?
Although the objective of the UK online security law to protect children online is certainly crucial, its implementation has so far encountered a strong reaction among technologists, politicians and everyday users.
Confidentiality experts are particularly concerned about how current age verification solutions may lead to data violations and improper use. Others are also concerned about a “risk of overcoming” which could lead to undermining people’s rights to freedom of expression and access to information.
While calling for repealing the online security law, millions of British have also turned to the best VPN applications to avoid providing their most sensitive data to access a multitude of content on the web.
The question of whether the other suppliers could (and follow) will follow the legal path of Wikipedia is too early to know. However, this evolution certainly opens a precedent for similar platforms in order to challenge the categorization of the online security law of the United Kingdom.
