No more Bratz after the holidays...

[MegoSteve]

Looks like Mattel finally won their lawsuit. Whether it will do anything for Barbie's slow sales will remain to be seen. I'd expect some company to create a knockoff Bratz line in the same style.

Barbie beats back Bratz - Dec. 4, 2008

Should be interesting to see if they disappear off store shelves in the next week or so (even though they have until after the holidays to stop selling them). I'll be even more interested to watch eBay to see if anything happens there.

[ScottA]

WOW...

[mitchedwards]

Thats one toy line I'm glad my daughter has no interest in.

[toys2cool]

Good,those things are ugly as hell

[HardyGirl]

YAY! No more big headed hoochie mamas! I've hated this toy line since it came out! My students would bring these ugly things to school and I'd just wince.

Bratz Bonfire, anyone?

[SUP-Ronin]

The Bratz accessories are close to Mego Scale. Watch for vehicles to go on sale, unless they simply pull'em.

[TEXASFETT]

I think those dolls are really hooched out big time.But they where a hit don't and care for them hood rats!!!!

[Random Axe]

Mattel banged it's spoons on the high chair long enough and got it's way. Bratz, as tasteless as they can be, are not in any way a copyright infringement on Barbie. They look nothing like her, and their accessories and characters are not even remotely similar. Barbie and Mattel got their butts kicked the last seven or so years, period. Now they whine,cry and complain to a judge who probably has his own personal collection of Barbies to rule in their favor.

This judgement translates directly over to the action figure world. Hasbro could go after DC Direct, Jakks could sue Mezco. All figures are in some way influenced by other figures. It's the nature of the business. This Bratz ruling is a slippery slope, folks. I personally can't stand the toy line, but they have the right to exist. I guess every female doll from any other company is fair game now...

Scott

[David Lee]

Mattel banged it's spoons on the high chair long enough and got it's way. Bratz, as tasteless as they can be, are not in any way a copyright infringement on Barbie. They look nothing like her, and their accessories and characters are not even remotely similar. Barbie and Mattel got their butts kicked the last seven or so years, period. Now they whine,cry and complain to a judge who probably has his own personal collection of Barbies to rule in their favor.

This judgement translates directly over to the action figure world. Hasbro could go after DC Direct, Jakks could sue Mezco. All figures are in some way influenced by other figures. It's the nature of the business. This Bratz ruling is a slippery slope, folks. I personally can't stand the toy line, but they have the right to exist. I guess every female doll from any other company is fair game now...

Scott

I agree with Scott. While I detest these dolls, and we didn't allow our daughter to have them, it's really not right for Mattel to just bully out the competition, because they were short sighted... So to recap: good for the war against tasteless toys, bad for small toy companies and toys in general...

-Dave

[Bill]

Mattel banged it's spoons on the high chair long enough and got it's way. Bratz, as tasteless as they can be, are not in any way a copyright infringement on Barbie. They look nothing like her, and their accessories and characters are not even remotely similar. Barbie and Mattel got their butts kicked the last seven or so years, period. Now they whine,cry and complain to a judge who probably has his own personal collection of Barbies to rule in their favor.

This judgement translates directly over to the action figure world. Hasbro could go after DC Direct, Jakks could sue Mezco. All figures are in some way influenced by other figures. It's the nature of the business. This Bratz ruling is a slippery slope, folks. I personally can't stand the toy line, but they have the right to exist. I guess every female doll from any other company is fair game now...

Scott

Nothing to do with Barbie at all. The Bratz designer worked on the Bratz line to some degree while under the employment of Mattel.
A freelance artist working up a concept is one thing, but she was employed at Mattel at the time, making it property of Mattel. I'm surprised it took this long if they have proof of the work on the Bratz line in any form at Mattel.

[megojim]

Legally they have the right . . . . I just hate that every time Mattel does something poorly, instead of improving their own products they go after the competition. This was even handled wrong . . . . they should cut a deal for 30-40% of the profits and move on or have the right to morph barbie into a doll with an oversized head . . . .
idiots!

[Earth 2 Chris]

Not really sorry that my daughter won't be exposed to some of the skankier dolls in this line, but I'm sure it's not good news for the folks who work for MGA, which is sad.

Mattel should have taken a cut rather than kill them. My understanding is, the designer presented the line to Mattel while employed there. The concept was rejected, so he took it somewhere else. That's a no-no.

Chris

[Sandlantern]

Legally they have the right . . . . I just hate that every time Mattel does something poorly, instead of improving their own products they go after the competition. This was even handled wrong . . . . they should cut a deal for 30-40% of the profits and move on or have the right to morph barbie into a doll with an oversized head . . . .
idiots!

An analogy with a happier ending would be Gibson losing the lawsuit against Paul Reed Smith over the "Singlecut" guitar...IMO, what a Les Paul SHOULD be or have evolved to.

Gibson, makers of the 50-odd versions of Les Paul Guitars
(while I still admire the man and musician Les Paul, the guitars have been of dubious quality for decades, I've yet to play one that some other builder didn't make better)
decided that since PRS was making a far superior guitar (The Singlecut, very loosely similar to a LP) that really couldn't be mistaken by anyone for a Gibson LP and was cutting into sales, they stamped their widdle feet, unleashed their pack of lawyers, and generally attempted to bully the smaller (and, IMO again, far BETTER guitar maker) PRS.

The courts ruled in favor of Mr. Smith's company. Thank the Maker!!

[BlackKnight]

This is Stupid.
I buy alot of these every yr for Nieces... They like thier Big Heads, outfits & Assori. Better than Barbie. This is like When DC Sued Because Shazam! looked Like Superman and Won. I don't think it matters that the Guy who created these worked for Mattel. I mean,.. Whats on or with a Brat that is remotely the same on Barbie other than the fact that it a flipp'in Doll ? Mattel's just ****ed that Brat's have moved more stock than Barbie, ever since the 2nd Yr Brat Were out. Whatever.

[huedell]

I never understood why everyone finds them so skanky/offensive...

I mean, at least in the context of other dolls...

Aren't all little girl's fashion dolls supposed to emulate popular clothes
fashion trends lie Bratz do?

It's not like they marketed them as "Club *****" Betty Bratz or anything
like that.

What's the difference of a Barbie wearing makeup and showing some
skin...and a Bratz doing the same?

I'm not saying you guys are wrong for thinking this...I just don't get what's up.