Germany's War Against Wikileaks Continues: Deletes German Domain
from the yeah,-that'll-work dept
Last month, we were a bit surprised to find out that the German government had raided the home of the guy who had registered Wikileaks.de, the German version of Wikileaks. Now, as a bunch of people have submitted, the German government has pushed the German domain registrar DENIC to delete Wikileaks.de entirely. It really makes you wonder what the government is hoping to accomplish -- because so far, all it's done is call that much more attention to the fact that it seems scared to death of what might appear on Wikileaks (and what will certainly still appear on other versions of Wikileaks -- now with that much more attention).
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
The Truth
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Censorship
What Killer_Tofu said; The truth always stings harder?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Censorship
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Censorship
Yeah, everything the Nazis did was 100% legal under German law at the time too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The story is wrong
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Wikileaks-de-Denic-wehrt-sich-gegen-Sperr-Vorwurf--/meldung/1 36096
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The story is wrong
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The story is wrong
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: The story is wrong
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The story is wrong
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The story is wrong
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/More_detail_on_WikiLeaks.de_suspension
Reading that, it appears to me that wikileaks.de's registrar terminated the contract as punishment for upsetting Germany's foreign intelligence service, the BND.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Color Me Surprised
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RE: RE: the story is wrong
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: RE: RE: the story is wrong
Thanks. I did what you suggested and got a crude English translation. I am struggling with a couple of phrases, but the gist of it seems to be that the owner of the domain name wikileaks.de got a notice in December 2008 that he needed to take action or the domain name was going to be shut down. Apparently (considering the web site was shut down) he did not take any action.
I am not going to stake my life on my interpretation of the crude translation, but it seems like the domain provider may have gone out of business?
In any case, there is a paragraph further down that says that all the comments regarding association with Australian complaints and the separate police raid had nothing to do with the shut down of the domain name, which seems to be a procedural issue.
Wikileaks claims that it is investigating the matter. However, they also place the shutdown proximate to the raid and the complaint from Australia, so they are attempting to establish in the minds of readers a link between these events without any evidence.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: RE: RE: the story is wrong
So, that's your conclusion? In your mind it is just not possible that the registrar could be in the wrong, huh? What a load. Just because they blocked the domain does not prove that "he did not take any action".
I am not going to stake my life on my interpretation of the crude translation, but it seems like the domain provider may have gone out of business?
That's good, because you'd be dead. They did not go out of business.
In any case, there is a paragraph further down that says that all the comments regarding association with Australian complaints and the separate police raid had nothing to do with the shut down of the domain name, which seems to be a procedural issue.
So they say.
However, they also place the shutdown proximate to the raid and the complaint from Australia, so they are attempting to establish in the minds of readers a link between these events without any evidence.
They're just presenting the facts and there is plenty of evidence to corroborate the sequence of known events. Sorry if you don't like that. You almost sound like you work for somebody involved.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: RE: RE: the story is wrong
So, that's your conclusion? In your mind it is just not possible that the registrar could be in the wrong, huh? What a load. Just because they blocked the domain does not prove that "he did not take any action".
Um, actually, it does. According to Slashdot, he got notice in December 2008 that his ISP was ending its contract. He got a mandatory three month notice to move the domain name and HE TOOK NO ACTION...let me repeat that for those of you with overactive sarcasm, HE TOOK NO ACTION.
Incidentally, I neither said nor "proved" that "he did not take any action" in my original post. What is said, in plain English, was that he "apparently" took no action. Perhaps learning English might be of use to you.
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/14/0230200&from=rss
I am not going to stake my life on my interpretation of the crude translation, but it seems like the domain provider may have gone out of business?
That's good, because you'd be dead. They did not go out of business.
That was a question. Do you understand "question"? Do you understand that I was "uncertain"? Do you understand ENGLISH?
In any case, there is a paragraph further down that says that all the comments regarding association with Australian complaints and the separate police raid had nothing to do with the shut down of the domain name, which seems to be a procedural issue.
So they say.
And now so says slash dot. They did a babel fish translation that seems fairly clear.
However, they also place the shutdown proximate to the raid and the complaint from Australia, so they are attempting to establish in the minds of readers a link between these events without any evidence.
They're just presenting the facts and there is plenty of evidence to corroborate the sequence of known events. Sorry if you don't like that. You almost sound like you work for somebody involved.
Actually, the conjunction of events was deliberate to imply a connection between the events. Slashdot is already saying that the German government had nothing to do with the suspension. So, I guess your snotty little statement can go back where it came from. Sorry if you don't like that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How to translate a web page
http://babelfish.yahoo.com/ , then select German to English translation in the select from and to languages button, then click on Translate button.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]