Case dismissed – Wikipedia loses UK Online Safety Act legal challenge, but it may still be safe from age checks
- The non-profit group behind Wikipedia has lost its legal challenge against the Online Safety Act
- The Wikimedia Foundation opposes the possibility of being subjected to the most stringent rules
- London’s High Court said the decision isn’t a “green light” for Ofcom to implement new rules if they impede Wikipedia’s operations
The non-profit behind Wikipedia has lost its legal fight against the Online Safety Act – but it may still be on the right track to resist mandatory age checks.
On Monday, August 11, 2025, London’s High Court dismissed the judicial review that the Wikimedia Foundation issued in May to challenge the categorization under the upcoming implementation of the law.
The judge stressed, however, that the decision doesn’t give “Ofcom and the Secretary of State a green light to implement a regime that would significantly impede Wikipedia’s operations,” leaving therefore room for further legal recourse.
Not age checks on Wikipedia – for now
Starting from July 25, 2025, all online platforms that display adult-only or potentially harmful materials are required to verify their users’ age before allowing them to access such content.
Besides the most obvious names, social media apps like Reddit, X, or Bluesky, dating apps such as Grindr, and even the music streaming giant Spotify are amongst the websites you may not expect to have been impacted by age verification.
This is because, under the latest implementation of the Online Safety Act, these platforms fall into Category 1 of the scope of the law. This categorization requires providers to follow the most stringent rules, including a duty of care to shield minors from so-called “legal but harmful content.”
This is exactly what Wikipedia is worried about – and tried to challenge in Court. The group has argued, in fact, that forcing its UK volunteer contributors to get verified would undermine their rights to privacy, safety, free speech, and association.
Commenting on the Monday ruling, the Wikimedia Foundation said: “While the decision does not provide the immediate legal protections for Wikipedia that we hoped for, the Court’s ruling emphasized the responsibility of Ofcom and the UK government to ensure Wikipedia is protected as the OSA is implemented.”
Could the Wikipedia case set a precedent?
While the goal of the UK’s Online Safety Act of protecting children online is certainly crucial, its implementation has so far been met with a strong backlash among technologists, politicians, and everyday users alike.
Privacy experts are especially concerned about how the UK’s current age-checking solutions could lead to data breaches and misuse. Others are also worrying about “a risk of overreach” that could lead to undermining people’s rights to free speech and access to information.
While calling to repeal the Online Safety Act, millions of Brits have also turned to the best VPN apps to avoid giving away their most sensitive data to access a host of content on the web.
Whether other providers could (and will) follow Wikipedia’s legal path is too early to know. Yet, this development certainly opens up a precedent for similar platforms to challenge the UK’s Online Safety Act’s categorization.
You might also like
The non-profit group behind Wikipedia has lost its legal challenge against the Online Safety Act The Wikimedia Foundation opposes the possibility of being subjected to the most stringent rules London’s High Court said the decision isn’t a “green light” for Ofcom to implement new rules if they impede Wikipedia’s operations The…
