Background: Ian Linkletter, a learning technology specialist at the University of British Columbia, shared links to Proctorio's instructional videos on Twitter. These videos were unlisted on YouTube and intended to instruct educators about Proctorio's exam proctoring software. Proctorio claimed this act constituted a breach of confidence and copyright, leading to legal action against Linkletter.

Legal Proceedings: Linkletter sought to dismiss the lawsuit under the Protection of Public Participation Act (PPPA), arguing that Proctorio's action was intended to silence his criticism of their software, which he claimed harms students' emotional well-being.

Court's Decision: The trial judge denied Linkletter's application to dismiss, finding that Proctorio's claims of breach of confidence and copyright had substantial merit and that the public interest did not outweigh the continuation of the proceeding. The judge ruled that Linkletter had improperly shared confidential information that was not necessary to express his criticisms of Proctorio.

Appeal: Linkletter appealed the decision, but the Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge’s findings. The appellate court agreed that there were grounds to believe Proctorio's claims were substantially meritorious and that the public interest in continuing the lawsuit outweighed the interest in protecting Linkletter's expression.

Conclusion: The appeal was dismissed, affirming the trial court's decision to continue with the lawsuit against Linkletter for alleged breaches of confidence and copyright.