Mattel, Inc.: Case Study
Week 3 IRAC method
Aug 18, 2014
Week 3 IRAC method
Mattel, Inc. v. MGA Entertainment, Inc.
Case No. 11-56357 (9th Cir. Jan. 24, 2013)
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Facts
This was a litigation case between Mattel, Inc., the maker of Barbie dolls, and MGA Entertainment, Inc., the maker of Bratz dolls, Mattel stated claims for copyright infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets, and MGA stated its own counterclaim misappropriation of trade secrets. The idea for the Bratz dolls came from
Carter Bryant, who was a former Mattel employee (Berkeley Technology Law Journal,
2011, p. 581). Bryant, while he was still employed at Mattel came up with the idea and contacted MGA and signed a contract …show more content…
121). In the case of Mattel vs. MGA, Bratz dolls were not a ready made product on the shelves along side Barbie dolls. The fact that Carter Bryant came up with the idea on his own, does not justify Mattel Inc. to make a dispute because the idea of Bratz dolls was not copyrighted by Mattel Inc. Basically, it did not own a copyright in the creative designs behind the dolls. The verdict in 2011 stated that it found that the ideas, designs and name of the doll collection were not Mattel’s trade secrets and, MGA did not misappropriate any of Mattel’s trade secrets. The jury, however, found that Mattel misappropriated MGA’s trade secrets. Carter Bryant was initially found to have violated his employment contract for giving his idea to MGA and not forwarded to Mattel. The employment contract of Carter Bryant did not specifically outline that his ideas on his time off from work was still considered intellectual property of Mattel Inc. The evidence between Barbie and Bratz dolls was presented in court and it was stated that “whether the two work either substantially similar or virtually identical” (Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 2010, p. 581). If the two dolls were exactly the same then it could be argued that a copyright infringement
Aug 18, 2014
Week 3 IRAC method
Mattel, Inc. v. MGA Entertainment, Inc.
Case No. 11-56357 (9th Cir. Jan. 24, 2013)
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Facts
This was a litigation case between Mattel, Inc., the maker of Barbie dolls, and MGA Entertainment, Inc., the maker of Bratz dolls, Mattel stated claims for copyright infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets, and MGA stated its own counterclaim misappropriation of trade secrets. The idea for the Bratz dolls came from
Carter Bryant, who was a former Mattel employee (Berkeley Technology Law Journal,
2011, p. 581). Bryant, while he was still employed at Mattel came up with the idea and contacted MGA and signed a contract …show more content…
121). In the case of Mattel vs. MGA, Bratz dolls were not a ready made product on the shelves along side Barbie dolls. The fact that Carter Bryant came up with the idea on his own, does not justify Mattel Inc. to make a dispute because the idea of Bratz dolls was not copyrighted by Mattel Inc. Basically, it did not own a copyright in the creative designs behind the dolls. The verdict in 2011 stated that it found that the ideas, designs and name of the doll collection were not Mattel’s trade secrets and, MGA did not misappropriate any of Mattel’s trade secrets. The jury, however, found that Mattel misappropriated MGA’s trade secrets. Carter Bryant was initially found to have violated his employment contract for giving his idea to MGA and not forwarded to Mattel. The employment contract of Carter Bryant did not specifically outline that his ideas on his time off from work was still considered intellectual property of Mattel Inc. The evidence between Barbie and Bratz dolls was presented in court and it was stated that “whether the two work either substantially similar or virtually identical” (Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 2010, p. 581). If the two dolls were exactly the same then it could be argued that a copyright infringement