Would Zooniverse <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zooniverse> potentially be caught up in it? It is a citizen science website, and has UGC, eg: comments and discussion here: https://www.zooniverse.org/projects/artem-dot-reshetnikov/saint-george-on-a-bike/talk/5049/2900955
As I understand it, the comments are very much in response to datasets from the content provider - and are one way in which people contribute to the crowdsourcing - so perhaps it would be exempt? But since the point of the website is to encourage interactions between a community and datasets maybe it's not a clear cut case. On Thu, 18 May 2023 at 10:23, Phil Bradley-Schmieg <pbrad...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > Hello, hive mind - with all this talk of whether our projects (even > Wiktionary!) should be caught by the UK OSB, I was hoping to crowdsource an > answer to the question: who else might be unfortunate bycatch for this > ill-scoped "online safety" law? > I'll set out the key definition below, and hopefully you'll have some > ideas. I'll start the ball rolling with *OpenStreetMap* and *FixMyStreet* > ... > > For context: we're hoping to build support for an additional exemption for > services *"provided for the purpose of indexing, manipulation, discussion > and/or making available of content in the public interest, including but > not limited to historical, academic, artistic, educational, encyclopaedic, > journalistic, and/or statistical content"*. It'd be helpful to have > other examples of good projects that would benefit from being spared the > OSB's requirements, not least all the red tape that it requires! > > *Scope of the OSB **(ignoring parts dedicated to porn sites - and > glossing over a couple of smaller details, such as how combination services > are treated):* > > a. Applies to any “User-to-user service” and “search service” that "has > links with the UK" (e.g. UK users) and isn't exempt. > > b. A U2U service "means an internet service by means of which content that > is generated directly on the service by a user of the service, or uploaded > to or shared on the service by a user of the service, may be encountered by > another user, or other users, of the service (...) it does not matter if > content is actually shared with another user or users as long as a service > has a functionality that allows such sharing". It also "does not matter > what proportion of content on a service is" UGC. > > c. A search service is "an internet service that is, or includes, a search > engine", that is run by the provider of that site (rather than just > embedding Google Search into your own), but "does not include a service > which enables a person to search just one website or database." > > *Exemptions are set out in Schedule 1. These include:* > > 1. Services where the UGC is limited to > > - emails, or SMS/MMS; > - one-to-one live aural communications; > - comments or reviews relating to the provider's own content; > - sharing of such comments or reviews (about a provider's own content) > on a different internet service; > - services limiting user expression to like/dislikes buttons, emojis, > yes/no voting, or rating/scoring; > > (but the exemptions above do NOT apply if regulated provider pornographic > content is published or displayed on the service) > > "Provider content" is "content published on a service by the provider of > the service or by a person acting on behalf of the provider (including > where the publication of the content is effected or controlled by means of > software or an automated tool or algorithm applied by the provider or by a > person acting on behalf of the provider)." > So that would include, say, guest posters on your own blog, or columnists > on the Daily Mail website, but is unlikely to include WMF projects (since > contributors aren't acting "on behalf of" WMF). > > 2. Intranets and search engines that are run internally by *businesses.* > > 3. Services provided by UK public bodies or foreign sovereign powers > (except for childcare services, which have their own narrower exemption). > > 4. Certain UK-regulated (e.g. Ofsted-regulated) education/childcare > providers. > > Thanks in advance! > > *Phil Bradley-Schmieg* (he/him) > Lead Counsel > Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/> > > NOTICE: *This message might have confidential or legally privileged > information in it. If you have received this message by accident, please > delete it and let us know about the mistake. As an attorney for the > Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical reasons I cannot give legal advice > to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff > members in their personal capacity. For more on what this means, please see > our **legal disclaimer* > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer>*.* > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia UK mailing list > wikimediau...@wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk -- Dr Richard Nevell (he/him) Programme Manager and Connected Heritage Project Lead <https://donate.wikimedia.org.uk/> Wikimedia UK <https://wikimedia.org.uk/> is the national chapter for the global Wikimedia open knowledge movement. Follow us on Twitter <https://twitter.com/wikimediauk>, Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/WikimediaUK>, LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/company/496119>, and Instagram <https://www.instagram.com/wikimediauk/>. Wikimedia UK is a registered charity in England and Wales No.1144513 and Scotland No. SC048644. Company Limited by Guarantee, Registration No. 6741827. Registered Office Ground Floor, Europoint, 5-11 Lavington Street, London SE1 0NZ <https://maps.google.com/?q=5+-+11+Lavington+Street,+London+SE1+0NZ&entry=gmail&source=g> .
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
