.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_2.jpg){kind=link}
Written by Jacob Rogers, Associate General Counsel at the Wikimedia Foundation. Here, you may find the link to the original interview.
We share some considerations about the application of the recently adopted Digital Services Act (DSA), which lays down a new set of rules for online platforms. Under these new rules, Wikipedia has been designated as a VLOP and therefore bears some specific obligations. After one year of formal application, a first preliminary evaluation can be done. In this sense, the interview highlights Wikipedia’s specific characteristics, analyses the compliance burdens for the Wikimedia Foundation and offers some guidance for the future in order to preserve the Wikimedia model.
This week marks one year since the European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA) formally applied to Wikipedia. The DSA is a law that governs how to host websites for people in the European Union (EU). Wikipedia is just one of 19 platforms to be designated as a “Very Large Online Platform”; (VLOP) under the DSA because of its many European readers, meaning it now faces greater regulatory scrutiny. Notably, Wikipedia stands apart as the only VLOP that is hosted by a not-for-profit organization, the Wikimedia Foundation.
For many, including tech journalists and policymakers, it may come as a surprise to learn that Wikipedia is in the same DSA category as some of the best known for-profit social media websites, such as Facebook, TikTok, X (Twitter), and YouTube. Besides its nonprofit status, Wikipedia is unique because it is truly community governed. The information on Wikipedia is written and verified by a global community of over 265,000 volunteers, contributing to more than 63 million articles in over 300 languages. Moreover, those users, and not the Wikimedia Foundation as website host, set the editorial policies that determine what information will be on Wikipedia and how to write about it.
Volunteers compile and share information on notable subjects, citing reliable sources such as newspaper articles and peer-reviewed journals, according to the encyclopedia’s editorial policies and guidelines. Only encyclopedic content is allowed on Wikipedia. Personal experiences, opinions, or original research are not permitted. The site is not funded by advertising; it does not track your activity, sell your information, or use algorithms to promote content. No matter where you are in the world, which device you are using, or what’s in your browser history, everyone sees the exact same information on Wikipedia.
After one year of working to meet a wide range of obligations under the DSA, we are reflecting on our learnings and perspectives on this law and its possible impact in the EU and beyond. While there are many positive aspects of the DSA — such as its emphasis on human rights, transparency, and accountability — the law presents compliance burdens for nonprofits like ours, and its approach may backfire if applied to countries with weaker governance systems.
The Global Implications of the DSA: A Cautionary Note
The DSA aims to create a safer internet by requiring platforms to implement measures that mitigate risks, prevent the spread of illegal content, and ensure users’ rights are protected. These principles have long been championed by Wikipedia: The platform’s open-editing system, combined with robust moderation by volunteers, has made it a trusted source of information for people worldwide.
We believe the DSA is a solid blueprint for legislation in other democratic jurisdictions with strong regulatory institutions, free press, and independent legal systems. It has the potential to help protect the rights of internet users across Europe. However, we are concerned about how the DSA’s approach and requirements could be misused in countries with weaker democratic institutions, where the law’s provisions could be used to intimidate website hosts into stifling free expression and access to information.
Even within the EU, during this past year, several people have attempted to use claims of illegal content to get legitimate information removed from Wikipedia. These “SLAPP” (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) cases are lawsuits in which powerful individuals or entities try to use claims of illegal content to prevent public discussion and knowledge sharing on important topics. In regions without robust safeguards, regulations like the DSA that require platforms to respond to these demands of illegality could push platforms into the role of censors on behalf of governments or those with power.
Compliance Burdens for Nonprofits
A major challenge of the DSA is the compliance burdens it places on nonprofits like the Wikimedia Foundation. While we recognize the value of Wikipedia’s compliance with the DSA, and are working tirelessly to meet its requirements, the burden is substantial.
Other VLOPs are primarily for-profit corporations with vast resources that are able to absorb the DSA’s regulatory impact more easily. Wikipedia, on the other hand, relies on donations and volunteer support. Even with highly efficient compliance efforts, the DSA likely represents a larger share of the Wikimedia’s Foundation’s resources than for any other VLOP. Despite these challenges, we have adapted to the DSA with resilience, demonstrating the strength of our model, centered on the contributions of hundreds of thousands of volunteers around the world who strive to make reliable knowledge accessible for all.
A Call for Harmonized Risk Assessments
We applaud that the DSA asks VLOPs to consider the risks their platforms pose to society, requiring annual risk assessments. When looking ahead to how internet regulations are developed worldwide, we advocate a harmonized approach to risk assessments that supports global human rights standards. This would minimize additional legal burdens on platforms and avoid a situation in which we must repeat nearly the same exercise to satisfy multiple jurisdictions.
Further, a harmonized approach would be particularly beneficial for platforms like Wikipedia, which operates on the basis of language, not country or jurisdiction. The online encyclopedia must appear the same wherever it is accessed in order to enable volunteer editors, wherever they are, to collaborate together in their chosen language.
By streamlining compliance, we can continue to focus on what we do best: providing free and open access to knowledge for everyone.
Community Resilience and Positive Impact Under the DSA
Over the past year, Wikipedia’s volunteer communities have successfully navigated the threats of misinformation and disinformation to multiple elections held within the EU. By providing reliable and accurate information about candidates and issues to millions of people across several languages, volunteers demonstrate the alignment between Wikipedia’s mission and the intent of the DSA to benefit society.
The DSA’s respect for and support of this community-led approach have been crucial to protect Wikipedia as a vital information resource. The DSA has played a role in ensuring that platforms like ours can continue to serve the public good without compromising our values of openness and neutral point of view.
We are proud of our progress in meeting the DSA’s standards. While we share in much of the DSA’s spirit, there are important learnings from our experiences of working to comply with the law. Looking to the future, there are opportunities for improvement in how internet regulations are developed worldwide. To support websites like Wikipedia that are built in the public interest, governments must ensure compliance burdens are reasonable for nonprofits. Further, we encourage all governments to ensure that their laws do not inadvertently force websites to become censors for the rich and powerful.
As the Wikimedia Foundation reaches this one-year milestone, we reaffirm our commitment to transparency, accountability, and free knowledge. With the support of our global volunteer community, we’re ready to continue to make reliable knowledge available for everyone, everywhere.