Online gaming: Luxembourg’s reports to Europol

Two web addresses referred to the public prosecutor’s office, fifteen reported to a platform: Luxembourg’s figures shed light on the difference between an offence and content moderation.

A platform’s decision to remove content is not a judicial conviction. The Luxembourg figures from an operation coordinated by Europol help explain this distinction, which is essential when discussing extremist content in online gaming spaces.

In Luxembourg, two different procedures

In an article published on 13 November, L’essentiel reports details from the Grand Ducal Police: two web addresses containing potentially illegal material, whose Luxembourg origin had been identified, were brought to the attention of the public prosecutor’s office. The police nevertheless point out that the geographical origin of posts is not always certain.

Fifteen other web addresses, hosted on the same platform, were reported. Fourteen were subsequently removed. According to the police explanations reported by the newspaper, this other content was not illegal under Luxembourg law: it was reviewed in relation to the service’s terms of use.

The two procedures therefore address different questions. The first concerns a possible offence; the second concerns what a platform agrees to host. Adding these addresses together and describing them as seventeen established offences would give a misleading picture of the case.

A European operation, with more recent local figures

Europol announced the action on 3 November. The Luxembourg figures published ten days later do not therefore mean that a new operation has just begun.

The EU Internet Referral Unit coordinated the action with Spain. Units from sixteen countries, including Luxembourg, took part. More than 9 000 links were reported, across 47 gaming platforms and social networks. This figure refers to links identified, not to an equal number of people arrested or items of content actually removed.

The agency explains that some groups use role-playing games to reproduce the symbols, structures or narratives of terrorist organisations. These activities can be used to spread propaganda and recruit people, particularly young people. The action targeted several forms of violent extremism and was not limited to one ideology.

The problem also extends beyond the game itself

To understand these practices, it is necessary to look at the exchanges that accompany gaming. The EU-funded GEMS project, presented by the Commission on 20 October, describes a process that is often gradual: humour, shared references and a sense of belonging can be exploited to normalise hateful discourse, then steer some participants towards other spaces.

The project also emphasises that these communities provide a largely positive social environment for most players. A violent game, a pseudonym or an isolated joke is therefore not enough, on its own, to form a picture of a person.

GEMS developed Watchtower, a tool designed to help analysts examine public discussions on streaming services, forums and gaming-related spaces. The Commission described it as still being tested in operational conditions, with human supervision. It is neither protection installed on every player’s device nor proof that every suspicious conversation can be automatically identified.

This distinction matters to families: the presence of detection technology does not replace paying attention to relationships and interactions.

Reporting content or asking for help

In Luxembourg, BEE SECURE offers two different points of contact. The Stopline accepts anonymous reports of potentially illegal content, including terrorism, racism and discrimination. Its form asks for details that make it possible to find the content and understand its context. A code can then be used to track the report.

The service analyses the information and passes it on to the relevant authorities; it does not itself make the final judicial assessment. A report is therefore not the same as a finding of guilt.

For a personal difficulty, such as cyberbullying or a question about an online experience, the BEE SECURE Helpline offers assistance on 8002 1234. The Stopline specifies that such personal incidents do not fall within its remit.

The right response therefore depends on what is needed: having potentially illegal content examined, or getting support with a situation someone is experiencing. Both procedures can be useful, but they do not serve the same purpose.

Keeping the right perspective

The case shows why the words used matter as much as the figures. A link is not a person; a removal is not a judgment; Luxembourg’s participation in an international operation does not, on its own, measure the scale of a phenomenon in the country.

For readers, the key is to know who to turn to and understand their role. Taking worrying content seriously is compatible with a precise reading of the facts, without portraying all players as a suspect population.