theoretical

I'm not why you are directing so much anger towards me. I'll gladly admit that I've not been through either UDRP or INDRP processes. That doesn't mean I don't have a vested interest or spent time researching previous cases. I respect your opinion, and I think I made it clear that I wanted you to speak out on the problems you see with the process, but not in the destructive way like you seem intent on doing here. I wanted to bring to your attention that there are people outside of Directi, NIXI and a couple of other companies that are or have in the past abused the INDRP process that are affected by your statements.

I'm not going to get into a legal argument with you because you'll win. Hands down. But to clarify my statement about responses, there are clearly rules about "Default" (determined by the arbitrator) and how to establish notification time frames so as to form a basis for responses (presumably from both parties) and that the decision is based on the documentation provided to the Arbitrator... not just what was provided in the initial complaint. The issues you mention should certainly be addressed by NIXI. If there is a specific concern with the Rig.in with the way it was handled (from what you've said it sounds like they didn't follow their own rules), I can't speak to it as the only information I have is what is in the dispute decision. I've read all or nearly all of the decisions, and there are numerous discussions of how it's incumbent on the respondent to prove their case... how else would they do that without having an opportunity to respond? Not that I'm happy that the respondent has to prove their case, but that's another matter. Even the rig.in case includes information that was provided by the respondent.

Looking at the rig.in case, I'm not sure where the arbitrator came to the conclusion of a legitimate claim. In some ways it seems as though they are trying to provide protection to domain owners (the owner of rig.co.in against someone registering a confusingly similar rig.in name), but it certainly seems like a very large leap of logic considering the circumstances.

Again, I want to hear what you have to say and I hope that you are providing your concerns directly or indirectly to NIXI. But for everyone sake, please don't damn the whole of the .IN domain community to what essentially boils down to about a dozen bad decisions in the last 4 years and really 2 or 3 "bad apple" companies. Point fingers where it's due, but don't flush the whole thing down the drain.

If someone does tape record your panel in Amsterdam I'll be all ears.