Why Should Mattel Get Future Plans For New Bratz Dolls?
from the gross-injustice dept
Last year, we wrote about a somewhat horrific court ruling against MGA Entertainment, the makers of Bratz dolls, after getting sued by Mattel. If you don't follow the doll business, Bratz is really the first doll to successfully compete against the massively successful Barbie franchise in ages. However, the guy who came up with Bratz had worked at Mattel prior to going off on his own. Of course, this is the history of many different innovative companies. If you come up with a better idea while working at one company, it's a good thing that you can go off and build your own company. As we pointed out at the time, this is the story of plenty of successful tech companies. Steve Wozniak was at HP when he built the first Apple computer (and continued to work there for some time after Apple was moving forward). Robert Noyce helped found Fairchild (and later Intel) after growing frustrated at Shockley Transistor. Hell, William Shockley founded Shockley Transistor after feeling he didn't get enough respect at Bell Labs. Yet, here's a toy designer at Mattel who's entire operation is getting shut down because he came up with the idea while still employed at Mattel?Even if you grant the somewhat troubling premise that the concept for the dolls was created at Mattel, at best you could make an argument that Mattel had some rights to an injunction and profits from the first generation of those dolls. Yet, the judge not only ruled that, but also that MGA had to give up all such dolls, and hand over all sorts of confidential info, including "all related products, designs, customer information and 'know-how' for a planned 2010 Bratz line." It's difficult to see any justification at all for forcing them to hand over future plans that had nothing to do with what the guy created while still at Mattel. MGA has now filed an emergency appeal, noting that if it does hand over such info and assets, it would have "devastating and irreversible consequences," which seems quite accurate. All in all, this seems like Mattel simply trying to stop competition, and it's a shame that the US court system seems to be helping.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: barbie, bratz, ownership, trademark
Companies: mattel, mga entertainment
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
They're NOT dolls, they're action figure collectables...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:not just dolls....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:not just dolls....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:not just dolls....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:not just dolls....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Tgeigs on May 29th, 2009 @ 7:25am
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wow
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wow
wow, you are truly benevolent...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wow
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yeah...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
PR
And what I think is really important is that Mattel will not release a Bratz doll, themselves, since they don't want to compete with Barbie.
As such, there will be a massive vacuum in the market for sexualized, "mature" girl dolls that will be damn-near-instantly filled with yet another competitor. Good job Mattel.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: PR
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: PR
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm of split mind on this
It's possible that there is something like that here. Perhaps, had this man not been working for Mattel, he would never have been in the situation where inspiration struck. Certainly he would not have seen any of the marketing data that showed him how to make a popular toy.
That's the unfortunate aspect of this type of thing. All too often we sign the contract that says anything we invent while employed by the company belongs to the company. The reason for these contracts are to prevent the creation of new Apples and Intels etc. New companies mean competition. And we all know how businesses hate competition.
It's not right. But then again, no one forced him to work at mattel, nor did they make him sign that contract.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm of split mind on this
You are completely wrong. Let's say that I go see some movie this summer and something in the movie gives me a GREAT idea for a book. I then go write a book and make millions because it's awesome. Do I then owe EVERYTHING I came up with to the creators of the movie because I wouldn't have had the idea without having seen the movie?
Look, this is how innovation WORKS. Everyone comes up with ideas with inspiration from all sources. The source of the idea doesn't matter unless it's truly a theft of someone else's idea (for example, stealing a trade secret).
Something like "being made aware of an opportunity to create a business" which the company you're working for will never create is NOT theft.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I'm of split mind on this
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: I'm of split mind on this
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: I'm of split mind on this
Tell me, what line of dolls did Mattel have him designing? Was it Barbie? If so, Bratz was not on the table and he is not obligated to share his personal endevors.
I happen to work with for a datacenter company. Nothing says that I cannot take everything that I have learned over the years through all of my work experience and open my own datacenter. hell I used to work in the Callcenter industry and I have applied all I know from my experiences there to what I do now. Do I owe the former companies anything? hell no. it is called learning from other's mistakes and finding a better way of doing it: INNOVATION!!!
Now, I am in no way a fan of Bratz, as a matter of fact, my daughter will never have one anywhere near her. It will end up in my chipper before I have a doll in my house that tries to make being ghetto cool. I do not condone any doll that looks like a hoochie mama hooker. No thanks. For the flamers, A suzie homemaker doll like Barbie is better than any bratz whore any day. I teach my daughter that self image is just that... just an image. No doll can harm her self image if she knows how she is supposed to be.
As for the situation, the designer owes nothing to Mattel. He is has innovated and it has paid off. It is just unfortunate that he designed that crap. Regardless he is in the right. Mattel is just pissed that they have a competitor and that Barbie is not the queen bitch of the universe anymore.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: I'm of split mind on this
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I'm of split mind on this
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I'm of split mind on this
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm of split mind on this
BUT if he worked in the doll dept he MIGHT have a true conflict of interest.
Mike won't agree I'm sure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm of split mind on this
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm of split mind on this
The only point your argument can make is that he was tipped off that a company was looking into cleaning up low level waste and therefore had the opportunity to beat them to the punch.
And as far as non-competition contracts, they are in my opinion much to broad and far reaching. In most cases they effectively make it illegal to form or work for any company that may be any sort of competition. An usually for some time after you are no longer employed at the company where you signed it.
As for the Mattel case, the only reason Mattel should have any right to Bratz is if he did in fact use company time, funds, or resources for the initial work on brats. The the thought that any ideas one my have while working for a company are owned by said company is absolutely ridiculous. As far as I'm concerned its nothing more than anti competitive bs. And the judge who set the precedent for it should be shot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Doll Business
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Banned in the US
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rights?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Rights?
Who said slavery was dead?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Rights?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Rights?
On the other hand, an employee that leaves a company and pursues to benefit their investment (themselves) ends up in court loosing ALL of their great ideas and talents to a Judge with a very bad judgment call.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yay! American Slavery: An equal opportunity employer...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A) Did he start WORK on Bratz while employed at Mattel?
B) Did he use ANY company resources (Mattel's) to do ANY preliminary work on Bratz while employed at Mattel?
C) Did he work in the doll design division (whatever) of Mattel (or was he the janitor)
D) Was there a signed contract?
The answer of those questions can change my opinion of this matter completely.
You do not get to get paid $$ to design a new product, then take that product to a competitor (or start your own company). You do not get to use another companies resources to design a new product (or for personal benefit). You do not get to break NDA's that you signed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Asnwers to cjm
A) YES - he designed the original Bratz dolls while employed at Mattel, as proved in court.
B) YES - he used parts of Barbie dolls to build his prototypes. He did it during working hours. He involved colleagues. He used Mattel supplies to draw the sketches.
C) YES - he was a doll designer at Mattel.
D) YES - as is standard in these corporations, he signed a contract that stated any products he created during his employment with Mattel belonged to Mattel. Fair or not, he signed it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Asnwers to cjm
A) YES - he designed the original Bratz dolls while employed at Mattel, as proved in court.
B) YES - he used parts of Barbie dolls to build his prototypes. He did it during working hours. He involved colleagues. He used Mattel supplies to draw the sketches.
C) YES - he was a doll designer at Mattel.
D) YES - as is standard in these corporations, he signed a contract that stated any products he created during his employment with Mattel belonged to Mattel. Fair or not, he signed it."
Yes. And they didn't do anything with it. So he went off on his own and established a successful line of toys.
NOW Mattel wants a cut?! Sorry, too late. Case closed. Should have paid more attention to your underlings. Move along, nothing to see here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Asnwers to cjm
BTW, even if he had shared his designs with Mattel and the company decided to do nothing with it, they would still be Mattel property, because that's what the designer was paid by Mattel to do: develop dolls FOR MATTEL. That was all clearly stated in the contract he signed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Asnwers to cjm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Asnwers to cjm
http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/354/354.F3d.857.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Asnwers to cjm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Asnwers to cjm
And even if the jury gave other original drawings to Mattel, should that allow Mattel full and total control of all Bratz IP generated by dozens of MGA employees - including the body sculpt which Bryant had no hand in? If anything, Mattel should get nothing more than half of what the Bryant made in royalties.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Asnwers to cjm
Has anyone actually seen this signed contract?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Asnwers to cjm
"he used parts of Barbie dolls to build his prototypes"
Barbie doll is really different in every detail from Bratz. Did he carve the plastic of barbie dolls? That is not forbidden, since it's just plastic. He could buy Barbie-clones in ebay to do it if he wanted.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Barbie was created by Ruth Handler, who directly copied the Lilli doll in 1959, before Mattel officially purchased the rights to the Bild Lilli doll in 1964.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why? Because...
...it's a shame that the US court system seems to be helping.
The US court system is quite shameful at times.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why? Because...
As an aunt, I have always been appalled by these dolls, which have promoted a selfish, consumerist "it's what's on the outside that matters, not on the inside" mentality and a boy-crazy, money-hungry attitude while telling impressionsble little girls that if they are not rich, thin or fashionable enough, they do not matter in the grand scheme of life.
Thanks to these dolls, my oldest niece (who was an avid Bratz collector for 7 years) stands in front of her mirror for hours crying that her hair, body, and clothing aren't good enough and refuses to drink milk for fear of getting fat, so I'm glad they will be gone soon. Maybe this will be the catalyst for the next generation of girls to be something more than walking clothes hangers or playthings for boys at their schools.
I'm no Barbie fan at all. In fact, I'd much rather my nieces have Demi Lovato or Selena Gomez dolls (girls who have acheived things on their own and do things the way THEY see fit.) than either Bratz or Barbie, but as that's not my call (that, and Selena Gomez dolls don't exist...yet), but since Barbie is the lesser of the two evils, you go Mattel!!!
Maybe now we can have our ambitious, career-focused, can-do little girls back, instead of the vapid, fashion-and-makeup-crazed-boy-obsessed little "prostitots" that Bratz dolls have created.
Why can't the toy industry create a few female dolls who defy gender steretoypes, such as heavy metal musicians, (I'm not talking musicians marketed to adults such as Angela Gossow or Alexis Brown, but I'd like to see some "kiddie metal dolls" with albums about following your dreams, doing well in school, doing your own thing, being a good person, not following peer pressure, etc instead of this "Bratz: Rock Angelz" and "Barbie Diaries" pablum that parents and other well-meaning adults so happily feed to the girls of the world), politicians, lawyers, artists, brain surgeons, pilots, mail carriers, construction workers, paramedics, college professors, journalists, disc jockeys,superheroes (no more Barbie dressed as Wonder Woman or Supergirl, as that is a slap in the face to those of us who looked up to these heroes as an anthesis to Barbie and Skipper as little girls.) a few wizards and dragonriders (no more cutesy, giggling pink dragons, please) for girls that love fantasy/sci-fi, instead of the usual teachers, nurses, fashion models, pop stars, veterinarians, mommies, baby doctors, pop stars, what have you. And everything DOES NOT have to be pink, purple, or white that comes with these dolls. They CAN and SHOULD be the actual real-life color of the item they are supposed to be.
We should have higher hopes for the little girls of our generation than to see them grow up like supposed "role models" such as Barbie, Bratz, Lindsay Lohan, and Hilary Duff. What happened to Women's Liberation? Is it out of style because it isn't a group of vapid, giggling women bowing to men's every wish and want? Let's have a little more respect, ambition and dignity for our daughters, sisters, nieces and grandaughters and tell these toy companies what WE want, instead of them telling us.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Why? Because...
I find it quite amazing that parents etc. are very quick to look for simple blame - when really, what part of the blame do they accept? It is shameful and extremely naive that you think some toys are to blame for the low self opinion or lack of morals of our children.
Clearly the parents here are not spending quality time playing WITH their children - rather leaving them in a room to amuse themselves. My wife and I love playing with our daughter - with yes, you guessed it, Bratz dolls and Barbie dolls at times - may not be my choice - but I take an interest in my children and their interests. When we play stories - we don't pretend the dolls are prostitutes and making out with each other - we pretend they have picnics and go to the beach or movies....May be corny - but it's innocent and fun.
I find as a parent hearing other adults carrying on about the images etc. being bombarded on our kids total hypocracy - it is up to us to keep it real for our kids. We are sewing the seeds about what is innappropriate by judging with an adult mind and making a fuss around our kids. The fact is, kids are just playing dress up - always have, always will....Mothers should be examining their own behaviour around daughters before placing blame on toys, tv, singers etc. Fathers should be looking at their own attitude to women etc and remembering that their sons get their biggest example from them!
We need to get off this blame game and accept that aside from putting blinkers on our kids, stuffing their ears with cotton wool and removing their imaginations - WE have to guide them and their attitudes as parents. Whilst my daughter may love dressing up and acting out - she certainly knows from us that people come in all shapes and sizes - have all sorts of ambitions - none better or worse...we explain and talk to her about what is pretend and what is real, what is appropriate and what is not...
For the record too - watch a Bratz or Barbie movie one day - you might be surprised - yes, they can be about dressing up and shopping, hair, make-up etc - but that's what girls are curious about - the stories actually do have substance though - they are about friendship, values and respect for each other....
And all the comments about Bratz doll appearance - I find the Barbie shape over the last 50 years far more disturbing - these are based on a so-called ideal woman's shape that is almost obtainable(?) - as some sort of iconic shape to strive for - At least the Bratz shapes are already comical and clearly not based anywhere near reality!
Wake up people and accept your own role in child raising!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Why? Because...
And to Chandra, you don't know too much about the Bratz, do you? You have a misguided opinion. You should learn about things before you judged them.
The thing is the "Barbie" promotes girls to dream big, but it also promotes big breasts, adulthood, pregnancy, and that only blonde "white girls" can achieve (there are barely any other races on their own merit). Bratz don't really have realistically proportioned bodies, and have gotten better about the clothes. I admit some lines were questionable. But that is what kids asked for. There are a lot of things questionable in children's media nowadays. But Bratz have diversity, and show us "minority girls" that we are just as equal to white girls, due to the fact that Larian is an immigrant and understands how it feels to be a minority in America, which is why Mattel can never do this correctly, even if they gained the rights to Bratz.
Yea Mattel won, but now they have the so-called "slutty" Bratz, which will taint Barbie's palace for real now. Mattel didn't take Bratz until they realized Bratz were successful and we know this. This isn't the first time somebody from Mattel went to another company and made a doll before their contract was over, it's just the first one who tried it and were successful.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Why? Because...
I did the same thing as your niece in the early 80's: looking at my image in the mirror. There wasn't any bratz dolls - and I didn't like the superficial-looking, shallow-smile-Barbie one bit. I liked the baby faced Sindy doll by Pedigree. All the consumerist stuff that children absorb comes from the society surrounding them...
I wonder WHERE do you live? There is pornography everywhere. Commercials and music videos draw their inspiration from pornography. That doesn't come from the dolls.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why? Because...
Our computer is down so I can't leave email but would love to join a boycott of BARBIE
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Facts
The judge gave Mattel the rights to products based on the original designs developed at Mattel, not to all Bratz related products.
These are the facts. Mike Masnick should get his facts straight before writting and publishing an article.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The Facts
Heh. You accuse me of stating inaccuracies, but I didn't state anything that contradicted the above. There is a dispute over how/when the dolls were developed. The guy says he developed not on company time, Mattel claims otherwise.
The judge gave Mattel the rights to products based on the original designs developed at Mattel, not to all Bratz related products.
Right, as we said in the post (what inaccuracies?) even if you accept that the original dolls should be Mattel's, it makes no sense to have them hand over future product plans and no how.
These are the facts. Mike Masnick should get his facts straight before writting and publishing an article.
Well, not quite. First, nothing I said contradicted anything you claimed and second it's not a "fact" that he developed it on work time. That's disputed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The Facts
Oh, by the way, M&M Mars wanted me to give you this summons for having those initials. It turns out that they owned those letters since before you were born, and so you are to be eviscerated, and your organs harvested to develop the next-generation of candy shells.
First generation damages, yes. That I can see, if skullduggery is proven. Future plans/profits? Hell no. I say MGA has a quick shred-a-thon, walks into court, and says "Plans? What plans?" Then they can start from scratch, building something eerily similar, but hopefully less trashy. My daughter's almost doll-age, and I'd prefer she didn't play with toy skanks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: The Facts
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The Facts
2) After reviewing the evidences, the jury (not the judge) found that the dolls were indeed developed while the designer worked for Mattel, and therefore stating that "there is a dispute over how/when the dolls were developed." is inaccurate. This has already been determined by the jury.
2) Again, future plans of the doll line based on the ORIGINAL designs that legally belong to Mattel per the contract the designer signed with Mattel. Products that don't resemble the original designs, are not included. Thus, stating that "future plans that had nothing to do with what the guy created while still at Mattel" is innacurate to the extent that such future plans are based on the very same designs created at Mattel.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: The Facts
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The Facts
Different opinions are great and important, but I find it sad and unnaceptable when the author of the article intentionally misrepresents the facts to support his opinion and bias the readers.
Mike - Just disclose the facts and your own opinion. Let the readers come up with their own.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: The Facts
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The Facts
1) To make an argument based on the assumption that "the jury are just imperfect people and don't always decide whats best" is simply ludicrous. By that rationale, you would conclude that the entire Justice system in the U.S. (which is based on the popular jury) is flawed and therefore worthless. Maybe anarchy would be a better system???
2) It's ironic how you show your true racist colors by accusing all Americans of being racists and hating Iranians. I really don't think that's a compeling argument for defending theft of intelectual property.
3) This country has already established that whether or not you drive that new car you purchased, it is still yours, and not someone else's to steal. Thus, arguing that because Mattel didn't make dolls from the designs it owns entitles someone else to steal them, is quite a flawed argument.
4) Discussion board etiquette: You don't have to post the same comment 4 times to make a point. We get the first time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Facts
And to Chandra, you don't know too much about the Bratz, do you? You have a misguided opinion. You should learn about things before you judged them.
The thing is the "Barbie" promotes girls to dream big, but it also promotes big breasts, adulthood, pregnancy, and that only blonde "white girls" can achieve (there are barely any other races on their own merit). Bratz don't really have realistically proportioned bodies, and have gotten better about the clothes. I admit some lines were questionable. But that is what kids asked for. There are a lot of things questionable in children's media nowadays. But Bratz have diversity, and show us "minority girls" that we are just as equal to white girls, due to the fact that Larian is an immigrant and understands how it feels to be a minority in America, which is why Mattel can never do this correctly, even if they gained the rights to Bratz.
Yea Mattel won, but now they have the so-called "slutty" Bratz, which will taint Barbie's palace for real now. Mattel didn't take Bratz until they realized Bratz were successful and we know this. This isn't the first time somebody from Mattel went to another company and made a doll before their contract was over, it's just the first one who tried it and were successful.
Like I said, it has been my experience that when it came to businesses that seemed to be the biggest, like Disney and Mattel, life is unfair. I've seen it happen too many times. Not all court cases, but the ones dealing with Mattel are. As far as I'm concerned it's a bit far-fetched to give all IDEAS FROM NEXT YEAR to Mattel and force MGA to stop making the latest dolls which have nothing to do with Bryant's drawings. Mattel just wants to take the dolls that have finally made money, it's obvious. They are trying to use that line, "we're trying to be fair." But it took a long time for them to apply that moral. If MGA had not been successful, do you really think, The Judge, Mattel would've pursued them and claimed any rights to Myscene? Nope. It's all about the money, and you and everyone else knows it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Facts
And to Chandra, you don't know too much about the Bratz, do you? You have a misguided opinion. You should learn about things before you judged them.
The thing is the "Barbie" promotes girls to dream big, but it also promotes big breasts, adulthood, pregnancy, and that only blonde "white girls" can achieve (there are barely any other races on their own merit). Bratz don't really have realistically proportioned bodies, and have gotten better about the clothes. I admit some lines were questionable. But that is what kids asked for. There are a lot of things questionable in children's media nowadays. But Bratz have diversity, and show us "minority girls" that we are just as equal to white girls, due to the fact that Larian is an immigrant and understands how it feels to be a minority in America, which is why Mattel can never do this correctly, even if they gained the rights to Bratz.
Yea Mattel won, but now they have the so-called "slutty" Bratz, which will taint Barbie's palace for real now. Mattel didn't take Bratz until they realized Bratz were successful and we know this. This isn't the first time somebody from Mattel went to another company and made a doll before their contract was over, it's just the first one who tried it and were successful.
Like I said, it has been my experience that when it came to businesses that seemed to be the biggest, like Disney and Mattel, life is unfair. I've seen it happen too many times. Not all court cases, but the ones dealing with Mattel are. As far as I'm concerned it's a bit far-fetched to give all IDEAS FROM NEXT YEAR to Mattel and force MGA to stop making the latest dolls which have nothing to do with Bryant's drawings. Mattel just wants to take the dolls that have finally made money, it's obvious. They are trying to use that line, "we're trying to be fair." But it took a long time for them to apply that moral. If MGA had not been successful, do you really think, The Judge, Mattel would've pursued them and claimed any rights to Myscene? Nope. It's all about the money, and you and everyone else knows it.
And the double posting thing was an accident I can't get my computer to reply. Maybe because I wasn't signed in??.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Facts
Of course it's about the money. If someone steals a property of yours worth $0.50, would you invest the time, energy, and money (=lawyers) to recoup your $0.50? Certainly not, no matter how entitled you are to those $0.50. Yet, if someone steals a property of yours worth $1MM would you invest the time, energy and money to recoup it. Probably so... Thus, my dear Lauren, it is about the money and there's nothing wrong with it. Anyone would fight to recoup what's rightfully his/hers so long as the cost-benefit makes sense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The Facts
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Facts
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: The Facts
I understand that he did present his design to Mattel and they didnt want it because
1: they didnt want to compete with Barbie and
2: they thought the dolls were trashy
It was only many years after Bratz became popular combined with declining market share for Barbie that Mattel decided to go to court against MGA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The Facts
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The Facts
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Happens all of the time ...
The last company laid him off; he worked in a completely different field for three years and then started his own company in the industry he had been a part of before and developed a innovative less costly product.
After he developed it, marked it and had sold a few units, a company (A large wealthy company) he had worked for six years earlier went to court in South Carolina and had a judge issue a TRO against his company and ordered them to cease all operations for “stealing” their non patented design and violating the spirit of a expired NDA (No non compete at all in place). Long story short … he didn’t have the money to buy lawyers to match their team of lawyers. Lost the case and was ordered to turn over ALL company records, computers, designs and hardware related to the product, and agree to NEVER work in the field again. I don’t know the exact details of the legal stuff but I know for a fact that the design was original and would have been popular in the market. He had years of experience in the field working for several companies and as a independent contractor.
Mattel - Bratt maker music/movie industry - innovators and users or the case i talk about here .... they are not different than what most of Mike's site is about.
You can have the best, most innovative, well executed product out there but you will go nowhere unless you have money and connections to compete in the courtroom and political back offices.
How can a "normal" citizen without massive resources (both financial and political) innovate nowadays?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You're on sand on this one
This comment hits it on the head:
"A lot of companies feel they are owners of whatever you come up with while in their employ. That reads 24/7, btw."
The reason they feel that way is because you sign a contract that says so. Fair, unfair, innovative, not innovative: these completely miss the point. He signed a contract.
Look, you can either be an entrepreneur or an employee. But should be an expect to be an "entrepreneur on a salary" with the upside of the former and the security of the latter. If he thought he was the kind of entrepreneur who could invent a new toy line without Mattel's help, he shouldn't have gone back to work there while working on the Bratz.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You're on sand on this one
And if anyone didn't notice this article is being sarcastic and talking about companies in general that relate to the situation. Geez, people have to be such know-it-all Coughs*Judge* give it a rest.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dissagree ChurchHatesTucker
NOW Mattel wants a cut?! Sorry, too late. Case closed. Should have paid more attention to your underlings. Move along, nothing to see here."
If got paid for an idea (Bratz) - took the money, bought groceries with it, whatever. It is up to Mattel to do what they want with the idea. They can sit on it, use it, joke about it, whatever... but the guy got his money and that is it, job done.
If I make you a watch (that you paid for), and you don't use it, I don't have the right to take it back from you.
You paid for it, do what you want with it... same concept IMO
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dissagree ChurchHatesTucker
I'm fine with that as long as Mattel does *something* with the idea. Patent/Trademark/Copyright (whichever) just SOMEthing. They did dick-all. He went and did something. Punishing that is counterproductive. Literally.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why?
I have no sympathy for the MGA Bratz company!
Maybe this decision will make people think twice before they steal information from their employer and sell it to another competitor company.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Why?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Copyright Infringement
Check out "Toy Monster: The Big, Bad World of Mattel", by Jerry Oppenheimer.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0470371269
Most of the inDUHviduals placing comments here do not know squat about this case.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Moral of the Story
MGA did not break into Mattel's El Segundo Watergate Hotel and steal ideas or secrets, nor did it arrest Carter and move him to MGA's Guantanamo Bay and subject him to waterboarding to get him to confess his ideas.
MGA told Carter to quit Mattel, then spent tremendous amounts of money and effort in developing the Bratz Franchise -- Mattel did not, nor did Carter. MGA developed the Bratz line thru talent, innovation, and plain old hard work.
Mattel with all of their resources and marketing and product development expertise tried to develop dolls to compete with Bratz thru Flava and MyScene, and failed miserably.
It seems morally odd to me that Mattel, who supposedly had "their ideas" stolen by MGA, could not even execute their very own ideas!
Since the beginning of mankind, it has been human nature to learn, then to take what is learned and apply it to life, and aspire to improve, innovate, and implement new ideas.
Yet the morality of this has been legally translated so that anyone trying to improve an idea is a thief. If it weren't for improvements, innovations, and implementation, we would all be driving Model T Fords and playing Pong.
We would not be sitting here on personal computers, that's for sure, if it weren't for adapting a main frame computer to personal use.
Bottom line, MGA stole nothing from Mattel. MGA took the germ of an idea and improved, innovated, and implemented.
Mattel did not develop the concept, nor would they have if they had seen it. Carter chose to change employers.
Mattel didn't like it, and will do all that is possible to put a competitor out of business for daring to "build a better mousetrap."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
what is really happening
Mattel spent 100 million dollars on lawyers, throwing 100 wild theories at the judge and jury about all the sinister things Bryant and MGA did to hurt them. There was enough evidence to disprove all of them. But all the negativity was overwhelming. Eventually Mattel succeeded in making the judge think Bryant and MGA were evil. But the jury was pretty smart. They found that Bryant worked on Bratz while a Mattel employee and awarded 10 million dollars for infringement (out of the 1.4 billion Mattel wanted). It was a fair amount, considering Bryant did do some of the development at Mattel. It amounts to about a third of what Bryant was paid by MGA for all of his work. It is interesting to note that the jury did not give Mattel ownership of the earliest Bratz drawings. But the two weeks that Bryant stayed at Mattel after signing with MGA cost MGA 100 million in penalties.
So, Bryant did some work on the concept while still a Mattel employee. It didn’t add much to the overall idea. He made a 3D mock-up using Barbie parts. Big deal. He never sculpted anything. All the actual doll design work was all done by MGA. The dolls that eventually came to market look very little like Bryant’s original drawings. This was all clear to the jury. End of story, right? No… the judge apparently now has other ideas. If he had thought to ask the jury if Mattel should have been given all of Bratz, they would have certainly said no. Why didn’t he ask them that question? Now he wants to just hand over all of MGA’s Bratz art worth billions of dollars and freely give it to Mattel? Mattel is even supposed to get all the designs and schematics to MGA’s newest dolls just because they bear the Bratz name (Babyz, Lil’ Bratz, etc.)? Come on. Something isn’t right here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: what is really happening
It's a shame that Mattel had to stoop this low to gain more money in the doll industry. If you want more buyers, change your outlook a little! I know a lot of parents of Bratz fans now no longer buy ANY of Mattel's toys due to this case. AND in the middle of a recession??!? Way to go Chuck Scothton.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
evil mattel
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Barbie/Bratz
This case has really put a bad vibe to purchasing anything from mattel in future. I have Barbie and Bratz, the thing I have a issue with is MGA did things with Bratz that Mattel forgot to do with Barbie.
The quality of the bratz and their accessories became far superior to what mattel was producing in their playline. Where barbie had cardboard accessories, Bratz came with handbags and backpacks that could really open, detailed outfits that were different and interesting.
So, it was not just this Carter Bryant fellow that did all that. MGA too the time to make just a regular playline doll collectable, where mattel just threw in useless cardboard and uninteresting things with their playline dolls.
Oh yes, you can buy a special edition barbie for more $$$$$ - but why are you going to spend more money when you can get a nice doll with cool accessories for $20?
Mattel has gotten to a point of wanting to pump out the same glitter covered princess dolls in their playline.
At some point between 2001 and 2009 they had something called "competition". They started to try different things, they started to try making better quality and more inventive things for Barbie.
So in a lot of ways Bratz was making them better.
Bratz came out in 2001 (if I remember right). Correct me if I'm wrong but I think the they started sueing in around 2004.
I have a feeling, what probably happened is they didn't care originally. They figured the bratz would crash and burn, but then after a few years they realized Bratz was not crashing and burning but becoming pretty damn popular.
This was not a case of OMG they stole our Dolls lets sue. Seems like to me it was more a case of OMG how can we kill these dolls.
Between here and there you have me a former Barbie collector who will not be purchasing anything from mattel any longer. So maybe they think they've won. They can go on making a million dolls clad in 'pink', go on making glittering princess dolls in ugly dresses that have nothing interesting to offer and go on making dolls they call 'limited edition' or 'gold label' - but they will not be getting any $$$ out of me any longer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Barbie/Bratz
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
this is compeltly stupid
mattel right now acording to that book is at the bottom of the barrel they dont have money they dont have sales they dont have products ...its just going down hill
mattel sued mga since its the last thing they could come up with to save there candy asses
the thing i feel with barbie is the reason bratz are better then her is the fact that ....
well i could list everything she does but that could take a month..
barbie = mother , princess, doctors,dancers,sports,
bratz on the other hand are more realistic....
also i dont see why mga lost the sue again mateel for there rip offs
my scene
you look bratz came 2002 and 2003 i believe was when my scene came
and thats a more rip off and theres been stuff online that shows mattel dident even have that doll in mind
if you agree with me your a human being
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mattel vs MGA
Cases like this make a mockery of the US justice system, particularly as it has such a high profile and is being reported on internationally. It really does raise questions on how the ruling decisions are being arrived at.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
MGA
Not for a moment should anyone believe that MGA is the underdog. Yes, they are smaller but Isaac has a reputation of being litigious and a knock-off manufacturer. He has shipped products to retailers that were different than what they ordered and then blamed it on the factory. He has invented research showing his products are better than competitors - he literally made them up.
Isaac is a liar and a thief. Take a look at his history of lawsuits. He has little concern for other people and their interests. Make no mistake - he is very smart, but he is a bad bad guy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: MGA
I would like to know if the judge has actually seen all of Carter's new hire documents? in fact, everyone is talking like they know what they look like, perhaps it's time they were in the public domain?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: MGA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The verdicts also were "tainted" by a juror who said during deliberations that her attorney husband had told her Iranians clients were "stubborn, rude ... and have stolen other person's (sic) ideas," the petition said.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
IP THEFT of the *BILD LILLI* doll
whose name was changed to *BARBIE*
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And if anyone didn't notice this article is being sarcastic and talking about companies in general that relate to the situation. Geez, people have to be such know-it-all Coughs*Judge* give it a rest.
racist..Americans hate Iranians and think they're all terrorists.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
MATTEL SUCKS
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
WHY?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bratz vs Barbie
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
barbies are copying bratz!!!
1. if you look close enough you CAN SEE THAT THEY HAVE SMALL LIPS THAT LOOK VERY ALIKE TO BRATZ.
2.DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHY THEY MADE MYSCENE SO THEY COULD TRY TO COPY BRATZ WITHOUT BLOWING IT BUT I KNOW THAT THEY COPYED.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
barbies are copying bratz!!!
1. if you look close enough you CAN SEE THAT THEY HAVE SMALL LIPS THAT LOOK VERY ALIKE TO BRATZ.
2.DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHY THEY MADE MYSCENE SO THEY COULD TRY TO COPY BRATZ WITHOUT BLOWING IT BUT I KNOW THAT THEY COPYED.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: barbies are copying bratz!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dear Mattel,
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mattel and MGA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Ninth Circuit
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I am not saying that it is fair for such rules to be in place but from what I gathered, this was pretty standard procedure. And yes, these are annoying rules.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
There must be a limit to 'my life' and 'work life'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
THat is absolutely bogus!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They are a sue happy company that couldn't innovate their way out of an open box. They higher consultants to do all of their thinking for them. The corporate management environment is a bizarre vacuum occupied primarily by short sighted career hopper without any vision except career advancement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bratz to stay
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Interesting Article
BY JEFF JEFFREY
1097 words
22 June 2009
The National Law Journal
NLJ
S11
Volume 31; Issue 42
English
Copyright 2009 ALM Properties, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
William Price knew that jurors wouldn't take kindly to a lawsuit filed by Mattel Inc. against a competitor if it appeared to be a case of Goliath bullying David out of the marketplace. Mattel makes Barbie, for crying out loud, the world's most famous doll.
That's why Price, 52, a Los Angeles partner at Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges, devised a legal strategy for Mattel that cast the toy manufacturing giant as simply one Goliath trying to collect what had been stolen by another Goliath.
The other company, MGA Entertainment Inc., sold Barbie's more risque rival, the Bratz dolls. Mattel believed that the Bratz dolls were based on a design originally developed by a Mattel employee who illegally turned it over to MGA when he joined that company. During the course of a seven-week trial last year, Price was able to prove that doll designer Carter Bryant had created the original drawings and sculpts of what became the Bratz when he worked for Mattel.
Those dolls, introduced by MGA in 2001, went on to become the company's most profitable product, bringing in more than $1 billion a year. In July 2008, a federal jury in the Central District of California awarded Mattel $100 million in damages. In December 2008, U.S. District Judge Stephen Larson ordered MGA to turn over all Bratz dolls, their associated products and the Bratz name to Mattel and permanently barred MGA from making, producing or licensing the dolls in the future. "Look, competition is fine," Price said. "But Mattel's whole point was that if you're going to compete with us, do it with your ideas, not ours."
KICKING AN UNDERDOG?
Clearly, Bryant, who had already reached a confidential settlement with Mattel before the trial, would be the single most important witness. Price feared the jury would see Bryant as an underdog being kicked around by a multibillion-dollar company. He wanted to keep the focus on MGA, which was represented by a team led by Thomas Nolan and Raoul Kennedy of New York's Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom. "What we wanted to do was show what kind of company Mattel was versus what kind of company MGA was," Price said.
Instead of starting the trial with Bryant, Price decided to work through the other witnesses first. The Quinn Emanuel team led off with two doll designers from Mattel, who were questioned by Price's co-counsel, John Quinn, about the day-to-day work of developing a new toy. "We were trying to get the jury to see that Mattel is a company that prides itself on creativity and what it takes to make an inventive product," Price said.
From there, Price took over, saving for himself the most hostile witnesses. He took the lead on questioning Paula Garcia, the MGA employee who lured Bryant away from Mattel. She testified that she didn't know that he worked at Mattel. "We were quickly able to disprove [that] through the testimonies of other employees whom she had told otherwise," Price said.
Price also called MGA Chief Executive Officer Isaac Larison. He got Larison to admit that Larison had hidden Bryant's role in the development of the Bratz line for years to avoid tipping off Mattel. "We showed the jury that he had behaved dishonestly," Price said. According to Quinn, Price "eviscerated" MGA's key witnesses. "There were 'Perry Mason' moments during each cross," Quinn said.
In addition to painting MGA as less than honest, Price used physical evidence to show that Bryant had cheated Mattel. Price introduced an employment agreement mailed by Larison and signed by Bryant. "We knew Bryant was working at Mattel at the time because it was faxed from the Mattel offices. It had the Mattel fax header on it," Price said.
The truly critical timing issue involved when the first Bratz-like dolls and sculpts were created. A forensic expert demonstrated that the original drawings came from a notebook that Bryant used while still an employee at Mattel. The pages with the drawings had been torn out of the notebook. But the expert pointed to the impressions left by the drawings on subsequent pages of the notebook, and to bank account calculations on other pages that also traced to Bryant's period of employment with Mattel.
By the time Price called Bryant to the stand, he hardly stood a chance with the jury. Price called Bryant as a hostile witness to explain a letter he mailed to a doll-hair manufacturer in which he identified himself as an MGA employee while still working at Mattel. "Bryant testified he did not intend to imply in the letter that he worked for MGA. I then pointed out that his letter had a return address of 'Carter Bryant, c/o MGA, etc.' He then said that now he couldn't remember what he intended," Price said. "That's the kind of stuff which impressed the jury—his general dishonesty."
MGA is seeking to appeal the case. Larson gave the company a one-year transition period to turn over the Bratz line to Mattel.
Despite the loss, Skadden's Nolan said that he was pleased by the way the jury structured its award for Mattel. The jury awarded Mattel only $10 million for copyright infringement, Nolan said, a fraction of the $1.7 billion the company had asked for. The other $90 million was for contract violations.
"We were also pleased that they found that neither MGA or Larison had willfully engaged in copyright infringement," Nolan said.
Price is off to a good start this year, as well. In January, he scored a win for Micron Technology Inc. in a lawsuit that blocked Rambus Inc., a technology licensing company, from enforcing 12 patents against his client. The judge cited Rambus' document-destruction policy. Rambus argued that the policy—which called for regularly scheduled "shred days"—was not designed to destroy troublesome documents in anticipation of litigation. Judge Sue Robinson of the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware didn't buy it. Robinson held that "the very integrity of the litigation has been impugned."
If the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upholds the ruling on appeal, Price said, Rambus could stand to lose out on billions of dollars in licensing royalties.
Contact Jeff Jeffrey at jeff.jeffrey@incisivemedia.com.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Interesting
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Interesting
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bratz
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
mattel
and im not happy
im sad as hell cant belive mattle did this sued bratz like come those people destroyed my thing to do when im bored or when to keep me to being happy i hate mattel
bratz should kick barbie ass and if they could and they did i would say barbie deserve that because barbie should thought of another way to get money like make more creative things well im sure that they cant do that and if they acnt and take down bratz they still is not gonna get no money cuz they an't creative at ALL
and at fisrt mga kick mattels but they deserve it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
GIVE MGA BRATZ BACK
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bratz
the bottom line is...
my opinion is bratz are better than barbie any day!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bartz
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I luv BRATZ
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I LUV Barbie because she is a decent hard working lady which has been austronaut and president and so many good examples for little girls like me... not like sluddy Bratz.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
not to offend...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mattel & Mgae
::::::::::::::::::Mattel
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Mgae
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mattel & Mgae
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
! MGA AND MATTEL WORK TOGETHER AND BRING BRATZ BACK TOGETHER !
Mattel work an agreement with MGA start thinking about other than just barbie those girls are getting sick of them, but bratz they love and it would make everyone happy, and it would stop all this MGA Vs MATTEL mess, i mean come on your adults for crying out loud. WORK TOGETHER!
-set and agreement statement/letter
-frame it, fire proff it whatever
-be happy about it
-stick to your times and agreements
-dont fall out too much
-surport it other in what you do Barbie & Bratz
-and at the same time show some FREINDLY compertion
-make all the girls in the world happy again
WE KNOW YOU CAN BOTH DO IT -TOGETHER!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ! MGA AND MATTEL WORK TOGETHER AND BRING BRATZ BACK TOGETHER !
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ! MGA AND MATTEL WORK TOGETHER AND BRING BRATZ BACK TOGETHER !
And there are times when that two weeks notice is sprung on you months later, I mean on one hand you're "at will" and on the other you're still hired and you don't know it. It's incredibly disappointing the courts work this kind of entrapment of former employees.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
pure american greed¡¡¡
its very clear why BRATZ was a major succes when they came out they were fresh,different and original,not the typical sexual girly girl bimbo stereotype,more cartoonish,more actioned packed,their collections more fun and colorful ,more inventive and imaginative,and of course with more accesories and clothes that barbie would ever dreamed off¡ I remember buying muy little girl her first brat,a tokyo a gogo brat(she never had a barbie she was never interested in barbies)the first time she saw them she feel in love with them she tought it was cool that this Girls were different,that they had more names than just barbie,that they were from different ethnical races and from different countries,and that they seem confident and brave to make any of her dreams come true¡ she didnt feel in love just with the dolls,she feel in love with the whole design(of the package,their accesories,all the little details that were by far better than barbie),
Its a shame what mattel are doing to MGAE, since when an employee of some company can´t take his(or hers)original ideas to other company to have a better chance of succes and opportunities(isn´t that what America its made of?)Does MATTEL employees gets hired to loose all their civil rights,to not think while they work there and to be turned into slaves so they just have to commit to their TOy Monster industry for life?¡ once again they shouldn´t blame MGAE ,it was their fault tha Barbie and other brands started to fail in the market,besides changing barbies clothes they never innovate or came with new and fresh ideas ,you can see it with other brands as hot wheels,the same molds with different designs,they tought they could leave of the same old tired formula,and it just got to that point,TIRED¡¡ they tried to compete bratz with flavas which was a horrible mistake,and Myscene which now its a shameful copy of the bratz,,and even worst now normal retail barbies are not even pretty anymore(the plastic and the materials are very low quality),they are just suin MGAE in a desperate action to put them out of the market,but they are doing to realize that even with that they will not gain the sales back unless they start to create their own and new lines,and they gotta realize they cant be a toy monopoly,the sun shines for everybody¡¡as I told you before in my house we never bought a barbie doll and never will¡¡we dont even buy other mattel toys my kids prefer playmates or Hasbro(go figure),Im wondering if they would start to sue those companys in an action of American greed?
shame on Mattel and shame on the American laws that permits this kind of abuse¡¡
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
pure American Greed¡¡
its very clear why BRATZ was a major succes when they came out they were fresh,different and original,not the typical sexual girly girl bimbo stereotype,more cartoonish,more actioned packed,their collections more fun and colorful ,more inventive and imaginative,and of course with more accesories and clothes that barbie would ever dreamed off¡ I remember buying muy little girl her first brat,a tokyo a gogo brat(she never had a barbie she was never interested in barbies)the first time she saw them she feel in love with them she tought it was cool that this Girls were different,that they had more names than just barbie,that they were from different ethnical races and from different countries,and that they seem confident and brave to make any of her dreams come true¡ she didnt feel in love just with the dolls,she feel in love with the whole design(of the package,their accesories,all the little details that were by far better than barbie),
Its a shame what mattel are doing to MGAE, since when an employee of some company can´t take his(or hers)original ideas to other company to have a better chance of succes and opportunities(isn´t that what America its made of?)Does MATTEL employees gets hired to loose all their civil rights,to not think while they work there and to be turned into slaves so they just have to commit to their TOy Monster industry for life?¡ once again they shouldn´t blame MGAE ,it was their fault tha Barbie and other brands started to fail in the market,besides changing barbies clothes they never innovate or came with new and fresh ideas ,you can see it with other brands as hot wheels,the same molds with different designs,they tought they could leave of the same old tired formula,and it just got to that point,TIRED¡¡ they tried to compete bratz with flavas which was a horrible mistake,and Myscene which now its a shameful copy of the bratz,,and even worst now normal retail barbies are not even pretty anymore(the plastic and the materials are very low quality),they are just suing MGAE in a desperate action to put them out of the market,but they are going to realize that even with that they will not gain the sales back unless they start to create their own and new lines,and they gotta realize they cant be a toy monopoly,the sun shines for everybody¡¡as I told you before in my house we never bought a barbie doll and never will¡¡we dont even buy other mattel toys my kids prefer playmates or Hasbro(go figure),Im wondering if they would start to sue those companys in an action of American greed?
shame on Mattel and shame on the American laws that permits this kind of abuse¡¡we want bratz on mgae back¡¡
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bratz dolls i think look honestly like sluts
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bratz Dolls
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
omg
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Fat-ass-males are history
Mattel-fat-ass-upper-class-sugar-asses have tried to put down many creative people, so that everything should be as dead and boring as their life in the money-tower. I wished they had a LIFE because that means IDEAS. At the moment the safety net of sugar-asses have failed and they try their old ways: to beat the living people with their dollars.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bratz
thats all i can say
bratz are MOST DEFRINATELY greater than barbie
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
MGA stop them
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mattel Fattel are soo cruel what about kids
How dare they please save bratz!!!!! plzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
had enough
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: had enough
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: had enough
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In fact I don't think Bratz should be shut down at all!
Mattel is just jealous of MGA because kids like Bratz more than Barbies!
Bratz have been around for 8 years and Mattel is just now suing MGA because the creator worked at Mattel first!
So what?? Last I heard you could quit from a job and go get another one some where better!!
MATTEL IS STUPID && BARBIES AREN'T MUCH BETTER!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In fact I don't think Bratz should be shut down at all!
Mattel is just jealous of MGA because kids like Bratz more than Barbies!
Bratz have been around for 8 years and Mattel is just now suing MGA because the creator worked at Mattel first!
So what?? Last I heard you could quit from a job and go get another one some where better!!
MATTEL IS STUPID && BARBIES AREN'T MUCH BETTER!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
STOP THE FAKE MESSAGES!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Fat-Ass-Males like Mattel are luckily the past
yes. It's JUST you.
Mattel is an oversized company that has fat-ass-males sitting in an office thinking about money. They thought their life is safe and secure... everything goes on as it always did. Then some littlle company challenges them, takes their financially built secure tower down. Now the fat-asses are thinking: oh, WE should work, we should have ideas or we lose our jobs... but all the creative people want to work in human-size companies without BORING and stupid fat-ass-males trying to patronise them. This is the real life story of small company success vs. dead monolith.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Moxie girls!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bratz Rule!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bratz
please do not give up on cloe,yasmin,sasha,and zade please please please
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ideas
Or u can sell a big box of all the bratz dolls
A box of bratz games
A box of bratz clothes,assesories,and shoes
A bratz divider like a little thing were u can put the clothes and there is a section were u can have shoes,and assesories.
Bratz hotel or new house.
Bratz bus
Bratz privite jet
Bratz concert
Box of Baby Bratz clothes,shoes,
New bratz Play Station 2 games.
New bratz movies
New bratz as alduts dolls
And i have more
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ideas
Or u can sell a big box of all the bratz dolls
A box of bratz games
A box of bratz clothes,assesories,and shoes
A bratz divider like a little thing were u can put the clothes and there is a section were u can have shoes,and assesories.
Bratz hotel or new house.
Bratz bus
Bratz privite jet
Bratz concert
Box of Baby Bratz clothes,shoes,
New bratz Play Station 2 games.
New bratz movies
New bratz as alduts dolls
And i have more
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ideas
Or u can sell a big box of all the bratz dolls
A box of bratz games
A box of bratz clothes,assesories,and shoes
A bratz divider like a little thing were u can put the clothes and there is a section were u can have shoes,and assesories.
Bratz hotel or new house.
Bratz bus
Bratz privite jet
Bratz concert
Box of Baby Bratz clothes,shoes,
New bratz Play Station 2 games.
New bratz movies
New bratz as alduts dolls
And i have more
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stupid MATTEL
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
STUPID MATTEL
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's a SHAME
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's a SHAME
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bratz mean old fat-mattel fattel
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
US Court Helping.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Message to MGAE Advocates
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bratz
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: bratz
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Along that, they also decided to kill off the competition (with the helping hand of the US Court). A real shame .... if this is not greed and lust, then I have no word to describe this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mattel has paid millions to the court
Anyway as an artist I can really relate to the Bratz designer. They were his OWN creations. They are so different from Barbie doll so that Mattel would have either rejected his ideas in the first place or at least transformed his ideas into some pink horror doll series.
Mattel has no right what so ever to Bratz dolls. That's my gut feeling. US courts can be bought, I see. This is madness. Could we have a democratic vote on the issue? I think most people would vote for MGA.
In principal, I will not buy any bratz dolls created by mattel, because I don't want to give my money to the Pink Thieves!
- Adult doll collector from Finland who happens to like Bratz
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
mattel is bad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
lets boycott mattel¡¡¡¡¡
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bratz
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
OMG.
I hope that MGA will survive this battle, I really cant live with out bratz
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The real funny part is....
True story, so I have no compassion for the scumbags at MGA over getting their butts kicked by Barbie...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mattel and MGA Entertainment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mattel vs Mga
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dont retire bratz dolls please!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dont retire bratz dolls please!!!
Every Xmas i always always whent shopping for bratz all the time this christmas i only got one with made me cry and i only saw one baby bratz doll in toyworld just one all alone on the shelf with all this STUPID barbie dolls crouding it and taking over its place I HATE IT BARBIE MAKERS I HATE IT!!!!!!!!
Give the Bratz back there place don't let them go please don't let them go pleeease.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dolls of the American Worker
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dolls of the American Worker
I've seen Barbies at garage sales, as well as Bratz, so I think your trumpeting Barbie as a legacy brand is laughable. Mattel has built this so-called legacy by seeking and destroying brands that threaten the sales of their own. The Bratz were the first doll line in years to make a significant dent in Barbie sales, and when the traditional avenue of copycatting failed, Mattel began to play dirty. They got a gigantic break when it was discovered that Carter Bryant had come up with the Bratz concept in between stints at Mattel, and they were able to manipulate the justice system to get their way in all the legal dealings.
And who says that Bratz can't be a "legacy" brand like you claim Barbie is? Supposedly being the dominant fashion doll brand does not entitle Barbie to legacy status any more than any other brand on store shelves. This Christmas, I will be buying a legacy brand for my girls, alongside MGA's new dolls... her name? Strawberry Shortcake. My girls will get the dolls they want, and Mattel gets none of my money. And that makes me happy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I couldn't agree more
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
hi
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
hi
Some kids now are getting to old for all this barbie stuff seriously DON'T TAKE THE BRATZ AWAY because they realy are the girls with the only pashion for fashion and bratz are just like me i like the mini skirts and short t shirts and I'm just as a careing friend as they are.
Please don't do this barbie please i'll cry all my life if they lose and bratz sell out infact I'm crying right now!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
GIVE THE BRATZ BACK!!
STUPID DUM UNSENSERBUL BARBIE THINKS SHE'S A LITTLE PRINCESS WHO GETS EVEYTHING SHE EVER WANTS!!!!! I HATE YOU MATTEL BARBIE MAKERS YOU SUCK!!!. Hey Mattel i can here your little princess calling out bring me my tea and crown. Your princess awates .
I hate barbie and i will never by them barbie your going down down down!!!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
why did they do this
p.s IT IS NOT FAIR
just to tell you mattle people, bratz are have more fashion. so like my argument or not this my o not your's so get some sense and kill barbie there is plenty of room 4 2 even 3 to include. Bratz did not copy, they look nothing alike.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
LEAVE THE BRATZ ALONE AND SUCK YOUR THUMB AND WALK AWAY MATTEL PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!
Bratz are my thing there my pashion and you CAN'T take that away its F STUPID.
Just to let you no you F mattel people who can't get anough of there little princess no one in this whole world that i know like's barbie they F hate it and like my agument or not i HATE YOU TO. This is my family and friends o and you should think about this have you noticed what you'v ben doing it's just a doll your bloody fighting over so the leave the Bratz alone and GET A LIFE. infact the Bratz had a good one until now you'v ruend little kids life's and ecpecerly brocken there hearts even mine Hmf Hmf.
Just to tell you one more thing my hole family has ruend there barbies and burnt them in our fire out the back hahahahaha you wasted your time on them barbies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: LEAVE THE BRATZ ALONE AND SUCK YOUR THUMB AND WALK AWAY MATTEL PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!
I love Bratz and barbie please stop doing this i am never bying s barbie again i love moxie but there just not like the bratz or well moxie is still better than barbie oh and Mattle you can't take that away as well if you do you must be jealous cuz moxie is better than DUMB!! barbie and same with bratz!!!!
Its so sad i'm never bying babie again!!! Hmf Hmf i'm crying really crying
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This whole things is a farce, a spit in the eye for
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
crap
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What a horrible decision!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's not over yet, but...
Finally, judges with reason are looking at this case! Overlooking the mistrial that should have occurred when the one juror made racist comments pertaining to MGA's Iranian-born CEO, I can understand the ruling that awarded Mattel the initial $100 million, but for Larson, who accepted the jury's verdict, to just decide to hand over the ENTIRE Bratz franchise, including the numerous characters and concepts that Mattel had absolutely no hand in creating, to Mattel was mind-boggling, and the way that it was to be done seemed like he was especially trying to stick it to MGA.
As much as this could be seen as a victory for MGA, I wonder if the damage hasn't already been done. I've seen Bratz sales dwindle to nearly zero at my neighborhood stores. Even if MGA eventually is allowed to make and sell Bratz legally again, will the pallor of the legal shenanigans by Mattel and their lackey Larson (yes, I am saying that he was in their pocket; why else would he have ruled the way he did?) continue to hang over the Bratz and impede their sales? Let's hope not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bratz pettisions
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bratz
bratz are one of a kind. they ARE the girls with the passion 4 fashion! they have big head 4 a reson people. there smart as helk. and there fashion is off the hook. i have the bratz in me. im sasha cause i cant live with out my hip-hop, yasmin cause i love to write different storys jade cause when i draw people there fashion is da best cloe cause im an angel and i freek out alot :D.
i really dont care if barbie stays but just bring bratz back for all the girl that loved them. cause if even if you dont cause of my letter thing, BRATZ WILL be COME BACK. bye Adrianna jones
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sad xmas
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
wow
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mattel didn't develop Bratz ideas, the fashions and the furniture designs. Mattel shouldn't have anything to do with Bratz. If they failed to make a complaint and a legal suit during the first year of Bratz, Then: TOO BAD. Now 10 years later they are just stealing from MGA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mattel didn't develop Bratz ideas, the fashions and the furniture designs. Mattel shouldn't have anything to do with Bratz. If they failed to make a complaint and a legal suit during the first year of Bratz, Then: TOO BAD. Now 10 years later they are just stealing from MGA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No matter what Mattel's media machine tries to tell everyone, this has never been about MGA stealing from Mattel. Mattel knows that it's always been about trying to kill off the competition so that Barbie will be the only name people think of when it comes to fashion dolls.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
GIMMEBRATZBAK!!
1. They have been around forever.
2. Lots of little kids around the world love them.
3. They teach you to be happy and reach for the stars.
Good Things About Bratz:
1. They are fashionable.
2. Kids of all ages, even teens, love them.
3. They ALSO teach you to be happy and reach for the stars.
4. BUT!!! They ALSO are COOL and HIP and MODERN!!!
Ha!
Personally I think both Barbies and Bratz are good brands of dolls. But Mattel is taking this too far. :^(
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
159357
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the BratzBring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
Bring back the Bratz
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 159357
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]