Alternative Dispute Resolution

They are wide-eyed, pouty-lipped and, by all accounts, complete Bratz. But despite their bad-girl looks, sales of these hip, urban dolls are now far outpacing sales of the more traditional, all-American Barbie. In 2004, however, Mattel, the maker of Barbie, filed suit against MGA, the manufacturer o...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The IP Litigator : Devoted to Intellectual Property Litigation and Enforcement 2009-01, Vol.15 (1), p.40
Main Author: Skaff, Stephanie
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Alternative dispute resolution
Disputes
Dolls
Litigation
State court decisions
Toy industry
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page
container_issue 1
container_start_page 40
container_title The IP Litigator : Devoted to Intellectual Property Litigation and Enforcement
container_volume 15
creator Skaff, Stephanie
description They are wide-eyed, pouty-lipped and, by all accounts, complete Bratz. But despite their bad-girl looks, sales of these hip, urban dolls are now far outpacing sales of the more traditional, all-American Barbie. In 2004, however, Mattel, the maker of Barbie, filed suit against MGA, the manufacturer of the Bratz dolls, accusing MGA of stealing the original design drawings that gave birth to the Bratz empire. The resulting litigation was, by all accounts, a doll-eat-doll fight. After years of litigation and a three-month trial, a 10-person federal jury returned a $100 million verdict against MGA, finding in Mattel's favor on several different legal theories, including copyright infringement and a variety of common law claims. But despite the verdict, the legal battle between the rival toymakers is far from over.
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_reports_219966510</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1653208451</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_reports_2199665103</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpjYeA0NLAw07U0NIngYOAqLs4yMDA0MzM252SQc8wpSS3KSyzJLEtVcMksLigtSVUISi3OzyktyczP42FgTUvMKU7lhdLcDIpuriHOHroFRfmFpanFJfFFqQX5RSXF8UaGlpZmZqaGBsbEqAEAyOMrNA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>219966510</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Alternative Dispute Resolution</title><source>ABI/INFORM global</source><creator>Skaff, Stephanie</creator><creatorcontrib>Skaff, Stephanie</creatorcontrib><description>They are wide-eyed, pouty-lipped and, by all accounts, complete Bratz. But despite their bad-girl looks, sales of these hip, urban dolls are now far outpacing sales of the more traditional, all-American Barbie. In 2004, however, Mattel, the maker of Barbie, filed suit against MGA, the manufacturer of the Bratz dolls, accusing MGA of stealing the original design drawings that gave birth to the Bratz empire. The resulting litigation was, by all accounts, a doll-eat-doll fight. After years of litigation and a three-month trial, a 10-person federal jury returned a $100 million verdict against MGA, finding in Mattel's favor on several different legal theories, including copyright infringement and a variety of common law claims. But despite the verdict, the legal battle between the rival toymakers is far from over.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1086-914X</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Aspen Publishers, Inc</publisher><subject>Alternative dispute resolution ; Disputes ; Dolls ; Litigation ; State court decisions ; Toy industry</subject><ispartof>The IP Litigator : Devoted to Intellectual Property Litigation and Enforcement, 2009-01, Vol.15 (1), p.40</ispartof><rights>Copyright Aspen Publishers, Inc. Jan/Feb 2009</rights><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/219966510?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>312,776,780,787,15294,36038,44338</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Skaff, Stephanie</creatorcontrib><title>Alternative Dispute Resolution</title><title>The IP Litigator : Devoted to Intellectual Property Litigation and Enforcement</title><description>They are wide-eyed, pouty-lipped and, by all accounts, complete Bratz. But despite their bad-girl looks, sales of these hip, urban dolls are now far outpacing sales of the more traditional, all-American Barbie. In 2004, however, Mattel, the maker of Barbie, filed suit against MGA, the manufacturer of the Bratz dolls, accusing MGA of stealing the original design drawings that gave birth to the Bratz empire. The resulting litigation was, by all accounts, a doll-eat-doll fight. After years of litigation and a three-month trial, a 10-person federal jury returned a $100 million verdict against MGA, finding in Mattel's favor on several different legal theories, including copyright infringement and a variety of common law claims. But despite the verdict, the legal battle between the rival toymakers is far from over.</description><subject>Alternative dispute resolution</subject><subject>Disputes</subject><subject>Dolls</subject><subject>Litigation</subject><subject>State court decisions</subject><subject>Toy industry</subject><issn>1086-914X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>M0C</sourceid><recordid>eNpjYeA0NLAw07U0NIngYOAqLs4yMDA0MzM252SQc8wpSS3KSyzJLEtVcMksLigtSVUISi3OzyktyczP42FgTUvMKU7lhdLcDIpuriHOHroFRfmFpanFJfFFqQX5RSXF8UaGlpZmZqaGBsbEqAEAyOMrNA</recordid><startdate>20090101</startdate><enddate>20090101</enddate><creator>Skaff, Stephanie</creator><general>Aspen Publishers, Inc</general><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYYUZ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090101</creationdate><title>Alternative Dispute Resolution</title><author>Skaff, Stephanie</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_reports_2199665103</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Alternative dispute resolution</topic><topic>Disputes</topic><topic>Dolls</topic><topic>Litigation</topic><topic>State court decisions</topic><topic>Toy industry</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Skaff, Stephanie</creatorcontrib><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database‎ (1962 - current)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM global</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Database</collection><collection>ProQuest advanced technologies &amp; aerospace journals</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>One Business (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>The IP Litigator : Devoted to Intellectual Property Litigation and Enforcement</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Skaff, Stephanie</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Alternative Dispute Resolution</atitle><jtitle>The IP Litigator : Devoted to Intellectual Property Litigation and Enforcement</jtitle><date>2009-01-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>40</spage><pages>40-</pages><issn>1086-914X</issn><abstract>They are wide-eyed, pouty-lipped and, by all accounts, complete Bratz. But despite their bad-girl looks, sales of these hip, urban dolls are now far outpacing sales of the more traditional, all-American Barbie. In 2004, however, Mattel, the maker of Barbie, filed suit against MGA, the manufacturer of the Bratz dolls, accusing MGA of stealing the original design drawings that gave birth to the Bratz empire. The resulting litigation was, by all accounts, a doll-eat-doll fight. After years of litigation and a three-month trial, a 10-person federal jury returned a $100 million verdict against MGA, finding in Mattel's favor on several different legal theories, including copyright infringement and a variety of common law claims. But despite the verdict, the legal battle between the rival toymakers is far from over.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Aspen Publishers, Inc</pub></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1086-914X
ispartof The IP Litigator : Devoted to Intellectual Property Litigation and Enforcement, 2009-01, Vol.15 (1), p.40
issn 1086-914X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_reports_219966510
source ABI/INFORM global
subjects Alternative dispute resolution
Disputes
Dolls
Litigation
State court decisions
Toy industry
title Alternative Dispute Resolution
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-24T13%3A35%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Alternative%20Dispute%20Resolution&rft.jtitle=The%20IP%20Litigator%20:%20Devoted%20to%20Intellectual%20Property%20Litigation%20and%20Enforcement&rft.au=Skaff,%20Stephanie&rft.date=2009-01-01&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=40&rft.pages=40-&rft.issn=1086-914X&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E1653208451%3C/proquest%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-proquest_reports_2199665103%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=219966510&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true