Judge orders company to stop making popular Bratz dolls

chron.com ^ | Dec. 4, 2008 | GILLIAN FLACCUS

[IronKros]

LOS ANGELES — The rowdy Bratz dolls have been evicted. Barbie has regained control of the dollhouse. Toy giant Mattel Inc., after a four-year legal dispute with MGA Entertainment Inc., touted its win in the case Wednesday after a federal judge banned MGA from making and selling its pouty-lipped and hugely popular Bratz dolls.

[IronKros]

Hopefully now I will no longer have to tell my 4 year old that those dolls are for big girls.

[Jemian]

I’m missing something here. The government has ordered a private enterprise to stop making and selling something? What right does the government have to regulate that?

There must be more to this case than what has been reported here.

[SJSAMPLE]

My wife refuses to let my daughters anywhere near the Bratz dolls.
I guess Barbies are just slutty enough ;)

[SJSAMPLE]

The designer of the Bratz dolls used to work for Mattel.
Mattel sued in court and it was ruled that the Bratz design was created on Mattel time.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Pouty lips ?

[Travis T. OJustice]

Yep, Barbie is a tramp from the suburbs, (with a good attorney) Bratz are innercity crack-ho dolls.

[Jemian]

Thank you. That wasn’t clear in the article. Now it makes sense.

[PGR88]

My wife and I call them SLUTZ.

Not sure why any parent would buy those for their girls.

[Travis T. OJustice]

HO.

[autumnraine]

While I disagree COMPLETELY with a judge ordering a private company to stop making a product (Barbie doesn’t own the fashion doll. Bratz looks nothing like Barbie) I am glad I don’t have to call them the “Slutz” dolls anymore.

[autumnraine]

HA! That’s what we call them too. With the Z on the end and everything.

Barbie did try to compete with their “Ho Dolls” as I called them. But they were the trashy line of Barbies

[autumnraine]

Oh yeah, and time to buy all things Bratz as they soon will be a collectors item?

[Melpomene]

You’re nicer than I am. I tell my daughter she can never play with those dolls, and she shouldn’t be friends with anyone who does.

[waxer1]

Yeah! I am going to wonder down to my local Kmart and pick up a few.

My daughter will not allow me to buy them for my granddaughter she is 4 going on 5.

I think the baby bratz are the worse of all.

[weegee]

And Barbie was ripped off in proportions and look from a German doll.

I guess this is one of those “no compete” clauses. Even if the employee had been working on designs at home while employed by Mattel the case could turn out like this.

[NavyCanDo]

The Ebay sales are going to skyrocket. And I don't think many of those are going to end up in the hands of little girls, but instead in the hands of people who want to turn a profit.

[SolidWood]

She has to be a mouthbreather... I can’t see a nose.

[weegee]

“It’s hard to be a pimp...”

[bamahead]

I’m missing something here. The government has ordered a private enterprise to stop making and selling something? What right does the government have to regulate that?

From the article:

The ruling, issued in federal court in Riverside, followed a jury's finding that Bratz designer Carter Bryant developed the concept for the dolls while working for Mattel.

The same jury later awarded Mattel $10 million for copyright infringement and $90 million for breach of contract after a lengthy trial stemming from Mattel's 2004 lawsuit ended in August.

I would assume that there must've been a clause in the designer's contract that stated anything created while employed by Mattel is the intellectual property of Mattel.

This is a pretty common clause in the design business, whether it's fashion, software, or even dolls...

The article is poorly written and doesn't volunteer that information. And the Judge's decision is waaaaay overbearing for these types of cases. Usually, some sizable restitution money changes hands in these types of suits, and they go on making their product. But to force a manufacturer to stop making something is uncommon. Again, probably something missing from the poorly written article.

[FES0844]

Whatever happened to Raggedy Ann???

[SolidWood]

There are Bratz... and there are Baby Bratz. Who exactly are they marketing them to?

[weegee]

Make that’s because her face was based on a a fish.

[Travis T. OJustice]

[Travis T. OJustice]

There are Bratz... and there are Baby Bratz. Who exactly are they marketing them to?

To put it nicely, "Single, stay-at-home moms who are not financially secure."

[Jemian]

Thank you.

[weegee]

Shouldn’t they come with tiny coke spoons on that chain?

[Comstock1]

You completely disagree that a court should be able order a company from violating the copyrights and patents of another company?

The dolls were created by a Mattel employee while he worked at Mattel. Therefore it was a work product that belonged to Mattel and MGA had no right to produce them.

[TexGuy]

The Ebay sales are going to skyrocket.

Only for a month or so, that should give most people time to come to their senses and realize that they aren't worth squat and putting food on the table during the "Obama Depression" will be more important. ... Then again there are a bunch of stupid people in the world.

[Cheburashka]

As explained in the story, it’s called breach of contract.

[Red_Devil 232]

[isthisnickcool]

Workers in China at the Bratz factory react to the news.

[VRWCmember]

There must be more to this case than what has been reported here.

If you only read the excerpt and not the article, there is definitely more to the case than what has been reported.

It is a copyright infringement case, and if you are making and selling something that is found to violate someone else's trademark or copyright you can bet your bottom dollar the government will step in and regulate that (and the federal government has a constitutional authority to do so -- it is one of the few constitutional authorities it has.)

[VRWCmember]

What right does the government have to regulate that?

US Constitution, Article I, Section 8
Section. 8. The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; ...
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;...

[sig226]

NEVER sign intellectual property agreements.

[Jemian]

The article was poorly written. The problem was not very well explained.

[Above My Pay Grade]

The judge made the ruling after a jury found that the creator of Bratz had developed them while working for Mattel and then took the idea to MGA, which marketed the dolls.

[VRWCmember]

The article was poorly written. The problem was not very well explained.

Perhaps. But from the article, this is the crux of the story:

The ruling, issued in federal court in Riverside, followed a jury's finding that Bratz designer Carter Bryant developed the concept for the dolls while working for Mattel.

The same jury later awarded Mattel $10 million for copyright infringement and $90 million for breach of contract after a lengthy trial stemming from Mattel's 2004 lawsuit ended in August.

[VRWCmember]

NEVER sign intellectual property agreements.

That is a good idea if you never plan to work for a company involved in development and production of new technologies or consumer goods. If you go to work for any major manufacturer or product development company, an intellectual property agreement will be one of the documents you must sign if you want them to pay you for working there.

[sig226]

If they want you, they will amend the agreement. If not, then you’re not an employee, you’re a slave. That explains the quality of a lot of television - slave labor at its finest. What really puzzles me is how they got this under copyright law. It’s almost unenforceable. Trademark is much better protection. I’m wondering how Mattel managed to have this as a copyright case. Perhaps they made a little goof in their agreements. Considering the money at stake, I’d expect an appeal, and I’d expect Mattel to lose the appeal rather broadly.

[weegee]

The contract is overreaching. I’ve seen corporations that required a release from the hiring contract to even allow an employee to work on any computer software at home/off hours (say a children’s game where your day job is testing hardware designs).

The corporations know that their contracts aren’t always binding, but they will leave it up to your legal team to challenge each one of them.

[weegee]

The toy could just as easily have been a carrot that you dress up or bunnies that have no wardrobes.

[weegee]

Good one.

[egannacht]

CHEW FASTER, YOU ARE FALLING BEHIND ON YOUR QUOTA!

[Comstock1]

Hmmm, or a product that is a direct competitor to your bread and butter.

[I Buried My Guns]

The Bratz doll pictured above has apparently snorted so much cocaine her nose has fallen off, poor girl.

[weegee]

Some people have to go the cosmetic route: