This sucks for Mattel!!

[LonnieFisher]

Since all the Mattel stuff gets posted here....

Mattel ordered to pay MGA $310 million in Bratz case - latimes.com

[johnmiic]

"The appeals court said Mattel couldn't claim a monopoly over dolls with a bratty attitude."

[BlackKnight]

I think it's great .
My Daughter, Nieces, and Friends little Girlies all love Brats .
The Clothes are pretty dang close to Mego Scale ...
I can't wait for them to come back in full force ..., makes the Holiday & Birthday shopping Easier for Me.

[Nostalgiabuff]

the Bratz chopper is pefect fit for Mego and my cpt. America rides it proudly

[jimsmegos]

Good. That's what they get for not making Robin. Seriously though, Mattel seemed greedy and arrogant in this case as a whole. Now a jury and judge has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Mattel can't have it all. Again I say, GOOD!

[samurainoir]

Could you imagine the irony if MGA did eventually get the DC Superheroes license?

It did seem kind of like a bit of a dirty move that Mattel tried to put the competition out of business with legal muscle rather than battling it out on the toy shelves with Bratz.

[Jerry68]

Good!
Mattel should stick to Barbies and cars.

[megojim]

What goes around . . . .

[megocrazy]

This was a tough case. The designer worked for Mattel, then didn't and then did again. His claim is that he developed the Bratz design while on hiatus from them between contracts. No way to really argue the point. If Mattel had kept him on the payroll this would have been an open and shut case, but businesses like this temp hiring deal using designers as contracted self employers. It saves them money but think the control Mattel would have had if they had Bratz and Barbie?

If he had done something like a copyright petition or like that they might have had a better time putting a date on it. They just couldn't.

Barbie was still the best selling doll out there when they started this. I personally believe this was Mattel saying hey don't screw with us were Mattel. It just backfired. When Matchbox was a competitor they bought them. They couldn't do this with MGA. I like competition it keeps new product coming out and the quality up. Maybe if they had to compete against someone for superhero sales the initial releases would have been better and not so poorly done.

[jimsmegos]

Could you imagine the irony if MGA did eventually get the DC Superheroes license?

Yeah but then Robin would have pouty lips and come hither eyes.

[jwyblejr]

So karma bit Mattel in the bottom?

[Meule]

Barbie was still the best selling doll out there when they started this. I personally believe this was Mattel saying hey don't screw with us were Mattel. It just backfired.

That's what I think too.

But at least now we know why they really shut down the DC retro line

[MicromanZone]

This was a tough case. The designer worked for Mattel, then didn't and then did again. His claim is that he developed the Bratz design while on hiatus from them between contracts. No way to really argue the point. If Mattel had kept him on the payroll this would have been an open and shut case, but businesses like this temp hiring deal using designers as contracted self employers. It saves them money but think the control Mattel would have had if they had Bratz and Barbie?

If he had done something like a copyright petition or like that they might have had a better time putting a date on it. They just couldn't.

Barbie was still the best selling doll out there when they started this. I personally believe this was Mattel saying hey don't screw with us were Mattel. It just backfired. When Matchbox was a competitor they bought them. They couldn't do this with MGA. I like competition it keeps new product coming out and the quality up. Maybe if they had to compete against someone for superhero sales the initial releases would have been better and not so poorly done.

Exactly. Mattel can go ram it up their collective plastic arse. They not only want to dominate the market by destroying competition, but they also want to play shell games with their staff/hiring practices by wanting to chain down freelancers but not properly compensating them in return. Past bullying and so clearly an abusive market control tactic.

The U.S. toy market would be so much better if more and more independent companies could grow and thrive. Not to be kings of the markets, just well respected in their own fields. That’s what I remember most about the 1970s toy market: So vibrant and so many genuinely different companies, not a brand name as a branch of a larger company.

Sucks for Mattel but great from the small guy. Excellent!

[Tothiro]

Interesting. This has been a longstanding kind of tactic with Matty though. MGA is the ugliest, longest version of it by far - but I'm not sure the Bratz line will ever really bounce back to the pre-lawsuit numbers it used to enjoy. I think market tastes have changed (and Mattel is printing money with their Monster High line, which frankly borrows quite a lot from the Bratz look).

There's a culture of corporate hubris at Mattel in my admittedly anecdotal experience... but it was telling that they sent an intern instead of the design guy who was scheduled to the industry panel at SDCC. Intern (assistant, whatever) then said some flamboyantly unprofessional, ugly things during the panel - essentially calling any known working talent in sculpting, prototype painting, etc a dirty hippie that would never cut it in the real world, or hold down a grown-up-big-boy-pants job like his in a cubicle. He actively offended his betters on the panel.

It was kind of stunning, especially from Joe no-name in a year where much of their fourth quarter stock was later recalled for lack of safety standard compliance - and for the fact that his handlers had to know what he was like but must have also figured, "eh... who cares?"