Comment by owisd
2 days ago
Problem with Wikipedia specifically going all-in on a UK block is, due to the licence, there's nothing to stop someone circumventing the block to make a OSA-compliant Britipedia mirror with minimal effort.
2 days ago
Problem with Wikipedia specifically going all-in on a UK block is, due to the licence, there's nothing to stop someone circumventing the block to make a OSA-compliant Britipedia mirror with minimal effort.
Except the effort and money needed to be OSA compliant. As the whole enwiki is permissively licensed everyone is welcome to do it though.
Fairly easy, just make it a read-only mirror.
It can't be read only because you need infrastructure and editors that review and approve every single change by hand. Even a single accidental violation could get the mirror shut down.
And Wikipedia continues on without having to worry about UK regulations. What's the downside for Wikipedia?
Anyone suggesting a block doesn't actually want Wikipedia to pull out of the UK, it's a negotiating position to extort concessions.
Is it? If the law would prevent Wikipedia from operating in the UK without adding age verification, blocking the UK is just a method of compliance. Organizations like the EFF want to strike down laws like this, but Wikipedia exists to operate a freely editable encyclopedia.
It's really down to whether Wikipedia feels that compliance would go against the organization's principles. If so, blocking the UK is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. If another organization steps in to mirror Wikipedia in a way that complies with UK law, there's no downside for Wikipedia - they maintain their principles and the UK continues to have at least some access to free information.