It's an interesting thing but I think their specific concerns are somewhat overcooked. As another commenter pointed out in the earlier thread: https://news.yco

It's an interesting thing but I think their specific concerns are somewhat overcooked. As another commenter pointed out in the earlier thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44721712 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44721712 > The categorisation regulations are a statutory instrument rather than primary legislation, so they _are_ open to judicial review. But the Wikimedia foundation haven't presented an argument as to why the regulations are unlawful, just an argument for why they disagree with them. Ofcom's SI could simply be modified to exclude research texts, and it could even be modified to exclude Wikipedia specifically; there's no obvious problem with that considering its scale and importance. If you go through Ofcom's checker: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/check https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-c... The answers are 1) yes, 2) yes, 3) no, 4) probably "No, but...", 5) no, 6) no. But the answer to getting out of the problem entirely might be to change the answer to question 6 -- that is, register Wikipedia as an education provider in the UK (since it is already used in that capacity). I mean Wikipedia have actually exhibited at BETT, the main educational tech show here; Jimmy Wales did a keynote.