Australia: The world’s biggest catfight: Barbie v Bratz

Commercial Law Update
Last Updated: 11 July 2011
Article by Catherine Logan

This article was first published in Lexis Nexis Australian Intellectual Property Law Bulletin, June 2011, Vol 24 Issue 2.

Google "Bratz and MGA" and you get 6,070,000 hits, but do the same with "Barbie and Mattel" and you get 11,600,000.

This suggests that while the cheeky urban Bratz dolls had a moment in the sun earlier this century, particularly in the United Kingdom and Australia, it was not enough to knock Barbara (Barbie) Millicent Roberts off her perch as the world's fashion doll diva. Barbie is still the queen of her category, even at the advanced age of 52.

Barbie was modelled on the blonde German fashion doll "Bild Lilli" (herself based on a cartoon character from the German Bild-Zeitung newspaper). Lilli, who was first manufactured as a novelty item for men, was sold in Germany from 1955 (four years before the first Barbie was manufactured in the United States). Barbie's owner, Mattel, did eventually purchase the rights to Bild Lilli in 1964 and stopped her production. Mattel has, on Barbie's slender shoulders, gone on to become the world's biggest toy maker. Judging from the photographs below, Bild Lilli and the 1959 Barbie Mark 1 could be twins.

Bild Lilli, 1955-64

Barbie Mark 1 19592

The above history, together with Barbie's continuing pre-eminence among children and collectors alike, makes it even harder to understand why Mattel has been waging a seven-year war3 against the company responsible for Bratz, a law-suit based on breach of copyright and misuse of trade secrets. MGA Entertainment (MGA) is, like Mattel, located in California, but is a relatively small toy company founded by Iranian immigrant, Isaac Larian.

The rise and fall of Bratz dolls

Bratz were launched in 20014 by the (then) tiny MGA, and sales appear to have peaked in around 2005/6. The doll segment of the toy industry has continued to decline as a whole since the mid-noughties. This is thought to be attributable to girls spending more of their playtime online and on hi-tech devices, and also exacerbated by the post global financial crisis recession. Following the recession, MGA has brought out two new, more "low key" product lines, Moxie Girlz5 and Moxie Teenz.

This file product image, provided by MGA Entertainment, shows part of the 2010 collection of Bratz dolls.

The Barbie/Bratz litigation (so far)

Another reason for the development of the new lines was a 2008 victory by Mattel in the ongoing litigation between the two companies, after which it looked as though MGA was going to be forced to transfer the Bratz line to Mattel following a $10 million jury verdict. (It should be noted, however, that Mattel had sought $1 billion in copyright damages in the trial).

Phase 1

The jury for phase 1 of the claim (the question as to which company owned the Bratz dolls) had found that Carter Bryant (Bryant), a former Mattel employee, had developed the Bratz dolls while employed at Mattel, and that the Bratz dolls therefore breached Mattel's copyright and the assignment provisions in Bryant's employment contract with Mattel. The jury awarded the damages referred to above, and the court ordered the following equitable relief based on the jury's findings:

  1. a constructive trust in favour of Mattel over the entire Bratz trade mark portfolio; and
  2. an injunction prohibiting MGA from producing and marketing virtually every version of the Bratz dolls, effectively handing the Bratz product over to Mattel.

The appeal court's decision on the phase 1 case

MGA won an appeal from this verdict last year.6 Bryant was found during the trial to have pitched the idea for the Bratz dolls, and the names "Bratz" and "Jade", and to have provided some sketches and worked on a sculpt (a model of the doll) for MGA in the period of August-October 2000, while he was still employed by Mattel.

The "ideas" versus the "inventions" – the constructive trust of the trade marks

The appeal court found that the lower court had erred in its instructions to the jury in construing Bryant's contract as an assignment of all Bryant's ideas when he was in Mattel's employ, as well as his inventions, as defined in his contract.

The appeal court held that "ideas are markedly different from the listed examples" in Bryant's contract of the term "inventions", which were expressed to "include, but (not be) limited to, all discoveries, improvements, processes, developments, designs, know-how, data computer programs and formulae, whether patentable or unpatentable", so that even though the examples given in the above definition were illustrative rather than exclusive, Bryant's ideas for the Bratz line, and for the names "Bratz" and "Jade", could not be included in the definition of "inventions" without consideration of extrinsic evidence as to the parties' respective interpretation of what the term "inventions" included.

This part of the decision is in some way an exploration of the principle of interpretation known as "Expressio unius est exclusio alterius" (ie, the express mention of one thing excludes all others). In any event, even if it would have been correct to have included the ideas, the appeal court held the imposition of a constructive trust of the Bratz trade mark portfolio went too far, as it denied MGA the benefits of its own research and development in developing the Bratz line of products.

In the words of Kozinski CJ, "the value added by MGA's hard work and creativity dwarfs the value of the original ideas Bryant brought with him, even recognising the significance of those ideas". The judge also referred to the Bratz brand as having been built up through MGA's "sweat equity".

The sculpt and the sketches – the injunction

As mentioned above, Bryant also did some preliminary sketches and a sculpt of the new doll for MGA while still employed at Mattel, and the appeal court agreed that these did fall within the definition of "inventions" in his contract of employment with Mattel. However, the appeal court held that the lower court had erred in construing the words of Bryant's contract on its plain language to mean that the assignment covered all works, whether created inside or outside the scope of Bryant's employment, and that this was a question which the lower court should have asked the jury to consider, based on extrinsic evidence presented of what the parties understood by the use of the term "invention". This finding vacated the copyright injunction, but the court went even further in its reasoning.

The sculpt

The appeal court also found that Mattel was only entitled to "thin" copyright protection against the copying of the sculpt – ie, the Bratz dolls had to be virtually identical to the sculpt in order to infringe copyright, not just be substantially similar, because "producing small plastic dolls that resemble young females is a staple of the fashion doll market" and therefore "the concept of depicting a young, fashion forward female with exaggerated features, including an oversized head and feet, is therefore unoriginal as well as an unprotectable idea".7

The sketches

As far as the sketches that Bryant did for MGA were concerned, the problem was that, while substantial similarity was the correct standard to be applied, there were unprotectable elements in the sketches that the court should have eliminated from the comparison before making it.

In other words, the fact that the Bratz dolls were not substantially similar to the sketches (beyond the fact that they expressed the idea of making fashion dolls with a bratty look or attitude) meant that the Bratz dolls were not a breach of copyright in the sketches, they were merely substantially similar to the ideas that the sketches expressed.

In vacating the equitable relief ordered by the lower court, the appeal court made several references in its judgement to the relatively small award of damages ($10 million) the jury made compared to the amount being sought by Mattel ($1 billion), and also stated that, because of the errors it had identified in the instructions to the jury, a significant portion of the jury verdict and damage award should be vacated, and that "the entire [phase 1] case will probably need to be re-tried".

Phase 2

Mediation following the above appeal decision was unsuccessful in resolving the remaining claims and cross claims between the parties. Undeterred, Mattel ran phase 2 of the case for about three months earlier this year before a new jury, but in a verdict handed down on 21 April , the jury found overwhelmingly against Mattel and in favour of MGA's counterclaims in the suit.

The jury did agree with Mattel that MGA and Isaac Larian had induced Bryant to breach his employment contract, but only awarded Mattel $10,000 in damages as a result – $5000 to come from MGA and $5000 from Isaac Larian. (Bryant had settled out of court with Mattel back in 2008).

In contrast, the jury awarded MGA over $88 million in damages against Mattel for stealing MGA's trade secrets by, among other things, sending spies to toy fairs using false identification. Other unfair business practices that MGA had originally claimed Mattel had engaged in included cornering the market in Saran (or polyvinylidene chloride – PVDC), which is used to make both Barbie and the Bratz dolls' hair.

The wash up

The most recent episode in this epic battle is MGA's application on 25 May of this year to have the court award MGA $177 million in punitive damages and $162 million in legal fees and expenses, on the basis that Mattel's unrelenting attitude to the litigation has brought MGA to its knees, or as one of MGA's lawyers, Annette Hurst put it, "hundreds of people lost jobs, the company was nearly destroyed, the brand was nearly destroyed and the full amount sought by MGA at this hearing is just one step on the path to remedying that harm".8

Mattel's counter to that argument is that MGA has not been successful on all its claims and there are actually many claims that it lost or were abandoned along the way, so it is not entitled to recover all its legal costs. It is notable that in awarding the $88.4 million to MGA in damages in the phase 2 trial, the jury found that only 26 of the 114 trade secrets listed by MGA had been stolen by Mattel.9

The hearing on post trial issues is continuing, but one thing is clear – these opponents are likely to have been better off spending the $200 million so far in legal costs (or the $400 million, in Mattel's case) in developing a cool online Barbie (or Bratz) World for girls to play in, rather than slugging it out in court. As it is, it is noted the current (rather lame) Barbie World, located at, closed on 1 June this year.

An opportunity missed? Barbie would surely not approve.

In the meantime, Mattel and its CEO, Robert A Eckert, has filed a motion to dismiss MGA's new antitrust, abuse of process and predatory pricing claims, to which MGA claims the "ninth circuit's ruling gave birth".10

1. See,

2. See,

3. Above note 1 – a suit was first filed by Mattel against its former employee Carter Bryant in April 2004.

4. The Bratz dolls and the (now discontinued) Mattel Diva Stars of 2000, and My Scene Dolls of 2002, all look very much like pop artist Lisa Frank's female characters of magazine fame in the early 1990s. See I'm not sure what the current range of Mattel's "Monster High" dolls look like.

5. See,

6. Mattel Inc v MGA Entertainment Inc, Isaac Larian, Carter Bryant 616 F3d 904,907 (9th Cir 2010).

7. Above note 6.

8. See,

9. The jury's award of damages for each breach was $3.4 million, which is how they arrived at the figure of $88.4 million.

10. See,

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Catherine Logan
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Mondaq Advice Centre (MACs)
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.