Mediatube Corp. v. Bell Canada, 2017 FC 6
Justice Locke - 2017-01-04
Read full decision. Automatically generated summary:
"In light of the foregoing, the only infringement issue that remains in dispute (the vestige infringement issue) concerns Bell Canada’s Fibe TV service, and the multicasting aspect of that service. The plaintiffs maintain that claims 1, 2, 4 and 18 of the 477 Patent are infringed, but only by virtue of the fact that the system could be modified to incorporate all of the essential elements of these claims. Because of these many late admissions by the plaintiffs, Bell argues that it should have its costs related to certain aspects of the action awarded at an elevated level, regardless of the outcome of the case. For their part, the plaintiffs seek elevated costs, regardless of the outcome of the case, because of certain allegations made by Bell. The parties’ respective submissions on costs are discussed later in these reasons. For the reasons set out below, I have concluded that the 477 Patent is valid but not infringed. I have also found that Bell should have its costs of this action, and that the amount of those costs should be elevated, for the reasons provided below, by 50% for most issues and on a solicitor-and-client basis in relation to the punitive damages claim."
Decision relates to:
- T-705-13 - MEDIATUBE CORP. ET AL v. BELL CANADA ET AL
- A-35-17(2018 FCA 127) - which is an appeal from this decision
- T-705-13 - MEDIATUBE CORP. ET AL v. BELL CANADA ET AL
- A-35-17(2019 FCA 176) - which is an appeal from this decision
- T-705-13 - MEDIATUBE CORP. ET AL v. BELL CANADA ET AL
- A-37-17 - which is an appeal from this decision