Patentee Found in Contempt Following Disclosure of Confidential Documents

The Federal Court has found MediaTube Corp. and its Chief Executive Officer, Douglas Lloyd, in contempt of breaching orders and directives issued by the Federal Court by disseminating Bell’s confidential productions. The decision, released on September 3, 2026 as MediaTube Corp. v. Bell Canada, 2026 FC 1125, highlights the consequence of knowingly and intentionally disobeying court orders.

Background

The contempt proceedings stem from MediaTube and Lloyd’s actual disclosure of Bell’s confidential documents, as well as repeated threats to Bell to disclose the documents, throughout 2021-2025. The documents themselves were produced in a patent infringement proceeding in 2014 and were subject to protective and confidentiality orders.

MediaTube had previously brought a motion to have some of the confidential documents made available to the public in 2018, pending its appeal of the Federal Court’s decision that found Bell had not infringed MediaTube’s patent. This motion was denied, with the motions judge expressly stating that the documents were sensitive and confidential. Following the Federal Court of Appeal’s decision, which upheld the lower court’s finding of non-infringement, MediaTube sought to re-litigate the patent dispute in the Ontario Superior Court. While this action was ultimately dismissed as an abuse of process, the Ontario Court affirmed that a confidentiality and sealing order should apply to the Ontario proceedings, as MediaTube’s submissions on the matter did not support the notion that Bell’s documents should be treated any differently than they had been treated in the Federal Court patent action.

Despite the protective orders, MediaTube and Lloyd nonetheless disclosed Bell’s confidential information, including by providing the documents to the Ontario Superior Court and Crown prosecutors in a bid to bring private prosecutions against Bell and its counsel, by publishing excerpts of the documents on a press release and then disseminating the press release on social media sites, and by sending the documents or information disclosed therein to various U.S regulatory agencies, as well as U.S. and Canadian media outlets.

Analysis: Three-Part Test

In its decision on the contempt motion, the Federal Court explained that, to find a party in contempt of breaching a court order, the following three elements must be met: (i) the order must clearly and unequivocally state what should or should not be done; (ii) the party alleged to be in breach must have actual knowledge of the order; and (iii) the party must have intentionally done the act prohibited by the order, or failed to do the act required by the order.

With regards to the first element, the Court rejected MediaTube and Lloyd’s submissions that there was no clear and unequivocal order barring publication of the disclosed information and documents. The Court found that the orders themselves clearly provided instructions as to who could receive a party’s confidential information, and moreover that the Court had on several occasions reiterated to MediaTube and Lloyd that Bell’s materials were confidential.

As to whether there existed actual knowledge of the order, Lloyd himself confirmed on cross-examination that he was aware of the protective orders, and that under a protective order, information designated as confidential could not be disclosed except in accordance with the order. Moreover, Lloyd had written a letter to Bell’s board of directors in April 2025, which stated that MediaTube acknowledged certain information was protected under the Court’s orders, but that the company would not be stopped by a “judicial gag.”

Finally, the Court found that Lloyd (and thus MediaTube) intentionally contravened the protective orders as part of a deliberate attempt to harass, intimidate, and coerce Bell into reimbursing the cost award issued by the Federal Court for the patent infringement action.

Outcome

As several aggravating factors were found to be at play (namely, the scope and prolonged nature of the breach and Lloyd’s unapologetic demeanor), the Court ordered a $70,000 financial penalty against MediaTube and Lloyd, with half payable to the Court and the other half in costs. The Court further issued an order declaring MediaTube and Lloyd in contempt, as well as requiring disclosure of the identities of persons who received Bell’s confidential information, and the destruction of Bell’s information and documents.