Hello!

Nerdy copyright questions are back in more than one way! Child protection
is here to stay. We will start working on the EU budget over the summer
break (unenthusiastic yey!).

Dimi and Michele



=== Child Protection  ===

Guidelines on Child Protection: On 14 July the European Commission adopted
its DSA child protection guidelines
<https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14352-Protection-of-minors-guidelines_en>.
A non-exhaustive list of recommended, but nonobligatory, measures on how
to  protect children from online risks such as harmful content, addictive
behaviours, or cyberbullying.

—

Some of the recommendations that struck yours truly were to set minor
accounts to private by default, limiting visibility to contacts, to disable
geolocation and microphone/camera access by default and to restrict
unsolicited messages and group additions without consent.

—

There was a feedback gathering period and the Wikimedia Foundation responded
<https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14352-Protection-of-minors-guidelines/F3496424_en>.
The tenor of the response was that one size fits all approaches are
inappropriate, considering how diverse platforms can be. One concrete
example in the guidelines is the recommendation that minors shouldn’t be
easily found or contacted by accounts they have not previously accepted as
contacts/friends. This is obviously not easily applicable to Wikipedia.

—

EP Report on Child Protection: The draft report
<https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/en/procedure-file?reference=2025/2060(INI)>
by Christel Schaldemose (S&D DK) and its proposed amendments
<https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/IMCO-AM-774602_EN.html> are
published. Refresher: This is a own-initiative, non-legislative report that
will basically end up as a sort of declaration. It can still indicate what
actions the parliament can get majorities for.

—

A first skim: Many MEPs seem to agree that addictive features of social
media platforms need to be restricted, especially when it comes to minors.
Centre-right (EPP) MEPs are also suggesting personal liability for higher
management should platforms systemically breach child protection provisions.

—

SHAMELESS WIKIMANIA PLUG: We are organising a child safety training
<https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/Event:Wikimania/Day_Zero_Child_Safety_Training>
at Wikimania during the pre-conference day. We have found a trainer with
heaps of law enforcement and trust & safety experience. Please feel welcome
to join!

=== Copyright ===

EP Report on AI & Copyright: And just because own-initiative reports are
such a blast, the parliament is working on another one (see draft
<https://communia-association.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Draft-Report-INI-on-Copyright-and-generative-artificial-intelligence.pdf>),
on AI and copyright, led by Axel Voss (EPP DE).

—

Here’s what stood out to us:

   -

   Voss claims that the training of generative AI systems is “currently not
   covered” by the existing TDM exceptions and requires clarification, e.g.
   by extending the exception to generative AI training (when opt-out is not
   invoked by publisher).


   -

   Voss suggests a levy/licensing scheme for generative AI outputs that
   infringe intellectual property rights.


   -

   Voss insists that AI-generated content should remain ineligible for
   copyright protection, and that the public domain status of such works be
   clearly determined

We like some parts of the above and are watching this :)

—

AI Code of Practice: The European Commission has published its AI Code of
Practice
<https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/contents-code-gpai>, a
delegated act under the AI regulation. It has a transparency section, a
copyright section and a safety & security section. On copyright input it
asks developers to "identify and comply with other appropriate
machine-readable protocols to express rights reservations". On copyright
output it says nothing specific, rather sticking to a "proportionate
technical safeguards to prevent infringements" language.

—

So far OpenAI, Google, Anthropic and Aleph Alpha have signed up, Meta has
declined, Microsoft is still pondering. If you want a closer read, the
Communia Association offers an excellent assessment
<https://communia-association.org/2025/07/21/our-thoughts-on-the-final-version-of-the-gpai-code-of-practice/>
.

—

Denmark is working on updating its copyright law to include:

1. A general protection against realistic, digitally generated imitations
of personal characteristics. This intends to protect the general public
against the sharing of imitations of people's personal characteristics
(appearance, voice, etc.) without consent.

2. An imitation protection for performers, which aims to protect artists
against the sharing of realistic, digitally generated imitations of their
performances or artistic achievements without consent. Think of someone
using an actor’s AI generated voice to dub an unlicensed film, for instance.

—

There is a public consultation process
<https://hoeringsportalen.dk/Hearing/Details/70269>. WMDK and WMEU are
still considering whether it makes sense for us to submit something. The
main puzzling bit is that these protections sound like personality rights,
not copyright. The draft does say that all copyright exceptions should be
respected, which again raises some further questions. The stated goal of
the Danish government is to give statutory protection, currently this
protection exists in Denmark only based on caselaw.

—

Italian Cultural Heritage Laws: German toymaker Ravensburger used the
Vitruvian Man, copyright long expired, on a jigsaw puzzle. Italy claimed
that its Cultural Heritage Code extends protection, even beyond Italy, and
sued. A German court now ruled against this. I will again refer you to
Communia’s excellent write-up
<https://communia-association.org/2025/07/10/higher-regional-court-of-stuttgart-confirms-territoriality-of-italian-cultural-heritage-code/>
.

=== EU Budget ===

The MFF <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiannual_Financial_Framework>
(Multiannual Financial Framework) is the EU's long-term budget framework.
It allocates resources over a 7-year period. The European Commission
proposed
<https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/eu-budget/long-term-eu-budget/eu-budget-2028-2034_en>
the new framework mid-July, outlining a draft EU budget for the 2028–2034
period.The negotiations will now begin after summer and will involve both
the European Parliament (majority needed) and the Council (unanimity
needed). It is expected that negotiations will last all of next year and
even seep into 2027.

—-

Wikimedia Europe will for the first time try to be part of these
discussions. Of particular interest to us are the successor to Horizon
Europe, the EU’s R&D program (priority areas, licensing, less bureaucracy),
the “education and democratic values” sections (details pending) and what
the EU plans to fund in terms of digital public infrastructure, citizen
engagement.

—

Perhaps noteworthy is that there will be a European Competitiveness Fund
<https://commission.europa.eu/publications/european-competitiveness-fund_en>
which explicitly backs pan-European public digital infrastructure and
interoperable and sovereign systems, which is defined to include
open‑source systems and platforms.

=== Democracy Shield ===

One of the political priorities of the Von der Leyen 2.0 Commission is
the protection
of EU democracy & values
<https://commission.europa.eu/priorities-2024-2029/democracy-and-our-values_en>
as stated in the Political Guidelines 2024-2029
<https://commission.europa.eu/priorities-2024-2029_en>.

In light of this, the EU Commission planned to put forward the
so-called European
Democracy Shield
<https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EPRS_BRI(2024)767153>,
a non legislative initiative that should be adopted in autumn.

The initiative wants to address key issues such as foreign manipulation and
interference, ensuring fairness of electoral processes, social resilience
and citizen participation. The Commission opened a public consultation.

—

Given the importance of the topic we have submitted
<https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14587-European-Democracy-Shield/F3557291_en>
feedback as Wikimedia Europe. We mainly highlighted that supporting and
protecting Wikimedia communities and projects can help protect and advance
democracy in the digital sphere
<https://wikimedia.brussels/european-democracy-shield-we-shared-our-views-with-the-commission/>.
We also  called for the application of the Wikipedia Test
<https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2025/06/27/the-wikipedia-test/> and
the protection of Wikimedia volunteer editors from strategic lawsuits
against public participation (SLAPPs).

=== EMFA ===

Last year, the EU adopted the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA)
<https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1083/oj/eng>, a regulation that
recognises the unique role of independent media services in the internal
market and whose aim is to safeguard media freedom and pluralism.

—

In view of the full entry into application of the new rules, which is
foreseen in August 2025, the European Commission launched a targeted
consultation on Article 18, the *so-called media exemption*. Article 18,
indeed, establishes that providers of very large platforms will have to *wait
24 hours before taking down or restricting content by self-declared media
providers* that may breach their own housekeeping rules — giving them time
to challenge the decisions.

—

The rule should only apply to Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) that are
used by media providers to allow access to their content.

—

We took this opportunity to share our views with the Commission
<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WMEU_Submission_Guidelines_Article_18_EMFA.pdf>,
mainly asking to clarify the specific nature of the platforms in scope
(thus excluding Wikipedia) and to acknowledge and safeguard Wikipedia’s
distributed and community-led model of content moderation.

===END===

-- 
Wikimedia Europe ivzw
_______________________________________________
Publicpolicy mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to