Glenn Brendel is a classical musician. Although he is now internationally famous for his work with symphony orchestras, he began his career by recording piano pieces by Bach and Beethoven. Those recordings sat unnoticed for many years in the basement of the Vancouver studio where they were made. Recently, however, Trilby Svengali, the owner of that studio, rediscovered the recordings and realized that they had economic value. She quickly released them on a series of CDs, which have since topped the charts.

While he is delighted with the public's reaction to his early work, Glenn Brendel is quite upset that the recordings were released without his knowledge, and he is very upset that he has not been paid for them. Svengali has responded by pointing to a contract that Brendel signed in 1971.
Svengali believes that that contract gave her ownership of the recordings.

Brendel sued Svengali in the Federal Court for breach of copyright. While each party was confident that they would win, neither was anxious to go to court. Consequently, at the beginning of the dispute, Brendel formally offered to settle his claim for $400 000. Svengali immediately responded by formally offering to settle the claim for $200 000. Unfortunately, the parties were unable to reach an agreement and the case has now gone to trial. Both sides have run up very large lawyers' bills.

Consider the issue of costs. What will the result likely be if the judge finds that (i) Svengali is liable for $500 000, (ii) Svengali is liable for $100 000, or (iii) Svengali is not liable at all?