Bratz Brawl

Bratz Brawl

The court battle that has been going on for the past 9 years has been between the popular Mattel known for Barbie and MGA the rival Bratz dolls. The legal issue is about who owns the intellectual property right to the Bratz franchise. The girls fashion doll that was worth $400 Million per year at the heights of its popularity. The original concept of the Bratz doll was from designer Carter Bryant. Bryant was working as an employee of Mattel at the time but soon after moved to MGA. Mattel soon then sued MGA claiming copyright infringement and theft of trade secrets. "From Mattel's perspective, it was very important for them to send a message," http://www.marketplace.org/topics/business/barbie-v-bratz-never-ending-court-battle

In 2008 a federal jury found the Bryant developed the idea and concept while being employed for Mattel. They awarded Mattel $100 million dollars. The verdict was quickly appealed and overturned and made to retrial. On the retrial the jury decided to in favor of MGA and rejected Mattel arguments. MGA counter claimed that Mattel did not develop the concept, but instead used employees with fake business cards to spy on MGA’s unreleased concepts and marketing plans, thereby stealing its trade secrets. The judge awarded $85 million dollars to MGA. Each side has spent over $100 milion dollars in legal fees at this point. We will do whatever it takes, to protect our intellectual property. "You can bet that anyone working for Mattel that's thinking of freelancing and coming up with a product of their own is going to think twice about how they do it," http://www.marketplace.org/topics/business/barbie-v-bratz-never-ending-court-battle

On Aug 4, 2011 the court denied Mattel’s motion for a new trial. It found that the recorded supported the jury’s verdict that MGA used viable efforts to protect its trade secrets. It ordered Mattel to pay an additional $139.9 million in attorney fees and costs. Now most recently Mattel asked a federal court of appeals to reverse the $310 million in damages and attorney fees. So the battle of the Brats brawl continues! The dispute holds an important lesson about the significance of well-drafted employment agreements. If Mr. Bryant’s employment contract had been more precise, the case might not have ballooned to such proportions or included claims for trade secret misappropriation. The two obvious problems with the agreement were failures to include 1) an express assignment of ideas; and 2) clear language defining the scope of “at any time during my employment.” Practically speaking, Mattel could have ensured all the employee agreements assigning rights were identical and created and communicated clear guidelines for employees, to reduce confusion as to where Mattel's ownership rights stopped and where the employees' began. As illustrated by this case, for businesses that thrive on their IP assets, carefully drafted employment agreements can make the difference between millions gained or lost.

 http://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2011/04/article_0006.html