Keep us a strong and independent voice for global justice: contribute today!

RESTENA Luxembourg forbidden domains, 2006

From Wikileaks

Jump to: navigation, search

Unless otherwise specified the document described here:

  • Was first publicly revealed by Wikileaks working with our source.
  • At that time was classified, confidential, censored or otherwise withheld from the public.
  • Is of political, diplomatic, ethical or historical significance.
  • Any questions about this document's veracity are noted.
  • The summary is approved by the editorial board.

Follow updates:

Secure talk join our chat.

To sponsor reportage of this document by mainstream journalists submit a targeted donation.

For press inquiries, see our media kit.

If you have similar or updated material ACT NOW.

For an explanation of the page you are looking at please look here.

April 27, 2009
List of ".lu" domains forbidden registration.
fast site, current site, Sweden, US, Latvia, Slovakia, UK, Finland, Netherlands, Poland, Tonga, Europe, SSL, Tor

Non-governmental organization
Primary language
File size in bytes
File type information
PDF document, version 1.3
Cryptographic identity
SHA256 8a93de409683a9343978bd96976d5f3aaccf84dfd895c572fc671d503b8819e0
Description (as provided by our source)

1. Has this file been released before anywhere on or off line?

This file is not official available for the public but can be found on the webserver of . But you have to guess the document name.

2. Why is this file important?

Being one of the founding members of the EU you would presume that Luxembourg is somehow mature with regards to free expression, freedom of speech and similar concepts. However similar to IRAN or other arab countries, there are certain domain names you simpy can't aquire.

Though Restena claims in their Domain Name charter #4, that it "[..] does not in principle proceed to any "a priori" verification of an application for a domain name" such verification of course happens, just a few lines below we read:

"Domain name applications which belong to one of the following categories are however (sic) rejected:

(a) the domain name contains the name of any Luxembourg municipality or village, ... unless it is the local administration in question filling in the application form for its own name as a domain name;
(b) domain names which are identical to an already registered domain name, or which are identical to a previously applied valid domain name;
(c) domain names considered obviously to be contrary to public order or good morals"

It begs the questions as to how exactly a simple domain name can be "considered to be contrary to public order or good morals" and who exactly decides what is against "good morals".

4. What are some approaches to verification (who can journalists call for comment etc)?

Well its available on the website, but not linked anywhere! [1]

Theres the proof!

5. Why was it leaked?

It was leaked to show that luxembourg is still not a country where freedom of speech and similar concepts are fully supported.


Know something about this material? Have your say!
Personal tools