Property, intangible

a blog about ownership of intellectual property rights and its licensing


  • Bratz Copied, But Didn’t Infringe

    Awhile back I reported on a new infringement lawsuit involving the Bratz dolls, this time a claim by a photographer that the dolls infringed an ad the photographer created for apparel and footwear company Steve Madden: Carter Bryant, the designer of the Bratz dolls, gave the ad to the sculptor who created the first “sculpt” […] Continue reading

  • The Fight for Bratz – With a New Plaintiff

    Just when you thought the Bratz story was over, it gets better. You know, the fight over the pouty-lipped dolls, where the designer, Carter Bryant, who was employed by Mattel off and on, claimed to have designed them while the relationship was off and then took the design to MGA Entertainment. Mattel sued MGA, won […] Continue reading

  • MGA Entertainment Wins Bratz! (For Now)

    Image from Counterfeit Chic “Staggering blow.”“Major reversal.”“Plastic cat fight of epic proportions.” “Astonishing loss.”  It just doesn’t get more dramatic than this.  In the everlasting dispute over ownership of the Bratz doll franchise, Mattel’s original $100 million verdict in the first trial is gone. Now Mattel gets a paltry $10,000 on an intentional interference claim […] Continue reading

  • Nothing Much New in Bratz

    There was a recent summary judgment decision in the Mattel v. MGA Entertainment case (otherwise known as Barbie vs. Bratz), but nothing much notable on the ownership front.  As it last stood, the Court of Appeals remanded the issue of ownership of the “Bratz” and “Jade” trademarks to the district court. Whether the names should […] Continue reading

  • “Who Owns Bratz?”

    Be still my heart, my title is the opening line in the 9th Circuit decision about the long-standing dispute over the Bratz dolls, a title I have somehow thus far missed using.  More background than you could ever want on the case is here. As we all know, MGA Entertainment lost in a big way.  […] Continue reading

  • Bratz Stayed!!

    I consider myself the unofficial recordkeeper for the Bratz litigation (so it was fate that the Secret Santa I pulled was for a Moxie Girlz), but I must have been sleeping on the job because everyone has jumped on this one before me. So playing catch-up to what’s already been reported by the IPKat, Techdirt, […] Continue reading

  • Do Ethnic Slurs Mean a New Trial?

    The National Law Journal is reporting (free subscription required) that four organizations – the Anti-Defamation League, the Public Affairs Alliance of Iranian Americans, the Iranian Americans Jewish Federation and the Iranian American Bar Association – filed an amicus brief in the Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, asking the court to grant a new […] Continue reading

  • MGA Now Has Moxie

    Never resisting the urge to be defiant, MGA Entertainment announced that it has a new line of dolls called “Moxie Girlz.” mox⋅ie /ˈmɒksi–noun Slang.1. vigor; verve; pep.2. courage and aggressiveness; nerve.3. skill; know-how. Provocative name for a provocative event. You be the judge whether they infringe the copyright in Bratz. (Moxie Girlz) (Bratz) © 2009 […] Continue reading

  • Small Comfort for MGA Entertainment

    At least the insurance company is coughing up something on the advertising injury clause. Not sure how much, “terms of the settlement were filed under seal so Mattel does not obtain ‘any strategic advantage through information obtained from the settlement agreement – including, but not limited to, information regarding the funding of MGA’s defense.’” (the […] Continue reading

  • No Good News for MGA Entertainment

    The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Kozinski, Paez and Tallman) has summarily denied MGA Entertainment’s motion for a stay pending appeal: “MGA Entertainment, Inc., MGA Entertainment HK Ltd. and Isaac Larian’s (‘MGA’s’) motion for a stay pending appeal is denied. MGA has not met the prevailing standard to show a substantial likelihood of […] Continue reading