The Complainant owns the TIVO mark (registered in association with streaming services), which matured to registration after the registration of the Domain Name. The Complainant argued it has common law rights in and to the Mark, and the delay as it relates an unrelated Opposition proceeding (after the mark was approved by CIPO) should not preclude it from arguing it has rights in the Mark.
The Registrant forwarded the Domain Name to a pay-per-click site. The Panel found that the Registrant (a well-known "serial cyber squatter") was using the Domain Name to forward to unrelated links, which still competes for internet traffic.
You can read the decision here.