Trade Secret Frameworks In Canadian Motion Capture And 3D Scanning Studios
Trade Secret Framework in Canada — Civil & Criminal Basics
1) No Federal Civil Trade Secret Statute
Canada does not have a dedicated trade secrets statute comparable to the U.S. Defend Trade Secrets Act. Trade secrets are protected mainly through common law causes of action such as:
Breach of confidence
Breach of contract (e.g., NDAs)
Breach of fiduciary duty (where applicable)
These are the legal avenues used by Canadian studios (e.g., motion capture/3D scanning companies) to assert rights when confidential tech or processes are misused.
2) What Qualifies as a Trade Secret in Canada
Canadian law looks at whether the information:
Has commercial value from secrecy
Is not generally known or readily accessible
Has been subject to reasonable confidentiality measures (NDAs, restricted access, encryption)
If these criteria are met, courts may treat the information as confidential and protect it.
3) Criminal Penalties
Canada’s Criminal Code (s.391) now defines trade secrets and makes it an offence to fraudulently obtain or disclose them — but this is mostly relevant in cases of serious corporate espionage.
📌 Trade Secret and Confidentiality Cases in Canadian Case Law
While there are few trade‑secret cases involving motion capture or 3D scanning specifically, the principles from key Canadian cases apply directly to those technologies. In the motion capture/3D scanning context, trade secrets often involve proprietary scanning workflows, calibration techniques, software code, or unique modeling processes.
1. Cadbury Schweppes Inc. v. FBI Foods Ltd. — Foundational Breach of Confidence Case
Facts:
Cadbury shared a secret recipe (Clamato juice dry mix) with a licencee for a limited purpose. After the licence ended, the licencee used that secret to produce a competing product.
Holding:
The Supreme Court held that:
The confidential information was a protectable trade secret.
The licencee owed a duty of confidence even beyond explicit contractual terms.
Misuse entitled the owner to damages — not necessarily an injunction.
Why It Matters:
In a Canadian 3D scanning or motion capture studio, internal workflows or software tools shared under licence with a subcontractor would be protected as confidential. Misuse of those tools (e.g., using them to create competing datasets) could be actionable under this framework.
2. Google Inc v. Equustek Solutions Inc. — Trade Secrets + Equitable Remedies and Injunctions
Facts:
Equustek alleged that its former distributor (Datalink) used its trade secrets to create a competing product and then fled Canada, continuing to market the competing devices online. Canadian courts ordered Datalink to stop, but it ignored orders and sold abroad. Equustek then asked Google (which indexed Datalink pages) to stop listing them.
Holding:
Canada’s Supreme Court upheld global takedown relief against Google to prevent ongoing misuse of trade secrets and unfair competition.
Why It Matters:
This case demonstrates that Canadian courts can craft broad equitable remedies to enforce trade secret rights against tech intermediaries if misuse is ongoing — this logic could extend to online distribution of proprietary 3D scanning models or motion capture data.
3. Lac Minerals Ltd v International Corona Resources Ltd — Confidential Information & Fiduciary Duties
Facts:
A mining company shared geological data with another. The recipient allegedly used the data improperly.
Holding:
The Supreme Court clarified that while fiduciary duties are not easily imposed in arm’s‑length commercial deals, courts focus on whether confidential information was misused.
Why It Matters:
Tech studios often work with external developers, artists, or researchers. This ruling emphasizes that confidentiality obligations must be clear and enforced, especially if no fiduciary relationship exists.
4. Epiroc Rock Drills AB v. Zimmerman (2025 BCSC 1757) — Trade Secret Definition & Evidence Requirements
(British Columbia Supreme Court – recent case)
Facts:
A company alleged that former employees breached confidentiality and misappropriated trade secrets but failed to define the specific information at risk.
Holding:
The BC Supreme Court dismissed the claim because the plaintiff did not identify specific confidential information or demonstrate misuse.
Principle:
Trade secret owners must precisely define what the secret is and show how it was misused — mere allegation isn’t enough.
5. Contract/Confidentiality Cases (Examples Across Canada)
While there are no famous motion capture–specific trade‑secret decisions, Canadian case law consistently enforces:
Confidentiality clauses in NDAs and employment contracts
Misuse of proprietary techniques, algorithms and designs
Cases where courts refused injunctions if information was not well defined or secrecy measures were inadequate (similar to Epiroc above).
These principles directly apply to Canadian motion capture/3D scanning studios as they:
Rely on proprietary capture rigs, software algorithms and processing pipelines
Must ensure robust NDAs, employee non‑disclosure clauses, and access controls
Must document confidentiality measures to support enforcement
📌 Key Takeaways for Motion Capture & 3D Scanning Studios
Trade secrets are enforced through common law — not a single statute.
Contracts (NDAs, employee agreements) are often the first line of defence.
Breach of confidence is the primary legal vehicle for civil claims.
Precise identification matters
If a studio sues for misuse of scanning algorithms, proprietary rig calibration workflows, or client‑specific processing methods, it must explicitly define what aspects are secret.
Courts can award broad equitable remedies
As in Equustek, Canadian courts may order far‑reaching injunctions when misuse is ongoing.
Employment and contractor agreements are critical
Since employees or outside developers might inadvertently (or intentionally) take confidential tech, robust contract terms and access controls are essential.
Criminal sanctions exist but are rarely used
Section 391 of the Criminal Code addresses fraudulent trade secret acquisition — important for serious theft cases.
🏁 Conclusion
Canada’s trade secret framework, though uncodified, offers powerful protection for proprietary tech in motion capture and 3D scanning studios — so long as secrets are clearly defined, confidentiality is actively maintained, and misuse is documented. Controlled disclosure through contracts, stringent internal security, and diligent documentation strengthen both preventive and enforcement positions.
RELATED Blog
comments