No one here is discussing whether the referendum is legal or not, but you keep bringing this subject up. I am not Catalan or even Spanish, so I don't care a bit

No one here is discussing whether the referendum is legal or not, but you keep bringing this subject up. I am not Catalan or even Spanish, so I don't care a bit for it. What's being argued here is that seizing the .cat TLD when a page registered in it was hosting "unlawful" content consists in pure and simple censorship. It would be similar to the US government taking control of the .com TLD because some website hosted on a .com domain is selling drugs. This is censorship. To quote the article (which apparently you didn't read) again: > Whether it's allegations of sedition or any other form of unlawful or controversial speech, domain name intermediaries should not be held responsible for the content of websites that utilize their domains. If such content is unlawful, a court order directed to the publisher or host of that content is the appropriate way for authorities to deal with that illegality, rather than the blanket removal of entire domains from the Internet.