A recent UDRP decision highlights a frustrating gap in domain name dispute resolution. The domainCapitalBayFunding.com, allegedly used for fraudulent financial services, will remain with its current registrant—despite clear signs of deception.
The complainant,Capital Bay Funding, LLC, argued that the domain was impersonating their business. The website used their real company address and operated a misleading phone line, raising strong red flags.

However, the UDRP panel dismissed the case. The reason? The complainant lackedvalid trademark rights.
Under UDRP rules, a complainant must prove three things:
Rights to a trademark matching the domain,
No legitimate interest from the registrant,
Bad faith registration and use.
In this case, although the complainant had registered a company and showed some promotional activity, they didn’t own a registered trademark or demonstrate sufficient commercial use of the name. Without this, the panel couldn’t move forward—even with signs of fraud and no response from the domain holder.
This decision underscores a key point:UDRP is not a tool for fighting fraud unless trademark rights are clearly established. For businesses, this serves as a reminder to secure trademarks early—especially if brand protection is a concern.