From: “Cohen, Benjamin” 

Date: 9 December 2008 11:19:07 GMT

To: “Cohen, Benjamin” 

Subject: Channel4 News Exclusive: Wikipedia founder considers legal action after site is blocked in Britain

CREDIT CHANNEL 4 NEWS WITH ALL MATERIAL USED

 

CHANNEL 4 NEWS EXCLUSIVE: WIKIPEDIA FOUNDER CONSIDERED LEGAL ACTION AGAINST INTERNET WATCH FOUNDATION AFTER BLOCK ON SITE- CALLS FOR REFORM OF SYSTEM

 

The founder of Wikipedia has told Channel4 News that the he is considering challenging in court the decision to block access to part of Wikipedia in Britain. Criticising the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) for blocking access in order to prevent UK users from viewing an image of an naked under 18 taken in 1976, he said that their actions have actually exposed more people to the image as it spreads throughout the web. The block is also meaning that millions of users in the UK are now unable to edit the encyclopaedia’s pages.

Commenting for the first time since most internet service providers in Britain blocked part or all of Wikipedia, the website’s founder Jimmy Wales spoke exclusively to Channel 4 News. He said: “My first thoughts when I was told that the Internet Watch Foundation had blocked the Wikipedia page was that we should take them to court. But because they’re not a statutory body, I’ve been told we can’t necessarily challenge their decision.” Although not a statutory body- the government has said that it expects all internet service providers (ISPs) to block sites on the IWF’s black list.

But Mr Wales told  Benjamin Cohen of Channel4 News: “The Internet Watch Foundation were clearly over reaching their remit when the blocked the text page on Wikipedia – there’s nothing illegal about the description of the album. I’d also question their wisdom about trying to block the image itself.”

Mr Wales, who was about to board a flight to India, told Channel4 News: “There’s no question that it’s a dodgy picture, but it’s an artistic protest made many years ago. But my concern isn’t so much about the image- it’s the ambiguous  way that they are behaving. It’s not clear if they are over-reaching their authority.

When asked if it was unfair to single out Wikipedia, when not taking action against the other websites including major retailers that  are  also publishing  the image, Mr Wales told Channel 4 News: “It’s clearly unfair and reprehensible for them to go after some websites and not others. People are so up in arms now.

“As a result of their actions, the image is actually being seen by more people, it’s appearing on thousands of blogs today. It will continue to be passed on. What are they going to do? Are they going to block all of the web if it continues to be spread?”

Mr Wales added: “How do we draw up a boundary line that allows both routine internet expression and not paedophilia ? The Internet Watch Foundation’s system has been in operation for a number of years. Is it out of date? 

“The knock-on consequences of their actions is that for many people in Britain it is now difficult to edit Wikipedia. 25 per cent of Wikipedia content originates in Britain, per head of population the UK is the largest contributor to the site.

He told Channel4 News: “While in the long term, the UK won’t go down the China route in blocking all the internet, it’s seems it’s to me that we need to take a second to look at how the systems works. We seriously need a system that protects freedom of expression online.”

  

ENDS