The second trial in the long-running Mattel and MGA\u2019s Bratz Doll Dispute began yesterday with opening statements in Federal Court (Santa Ana, CA).<\/p>\n
This time around, the trial is expected to take about four months. \u00a0As before, Mattel is suing MGA for copyright infringement damages, as well as over trade-secret theft. \u00a0In its defense, MGA is accusing its rival of unfair competition under state statutes and of stealing its own trade secrets.<\/p>\n
A prior veredict for $100 million in damages was overturned on appeal to the Ninth Circuit (Download the opinion here<\/a>). \u00a0As Bloomberg has reported, “In 2008, a federal jury in Riverside, California, agreed with Mattel that doll designer\u00a0Carter Bryant made most of the initial sketches for the Bratz dolls while he worked for El Segundo, California-based Mattel.” \u00a0See our prior post on the top lessons from the appeal<\/a> and our white paper on its consequences<\/a>.<\/p>\n The U.S. Court of Appeals ruling amounts to a finding that Mattel did not automatically own Bryant\u2019s design under the terms of his employment agreement, and to a reconsideration of damages on the basis that ownership of the Bratz dolls intellectual property had not been adequately apportioned between what Mattel may have owned, and what MGA had developed.<\/p>\n Unlike the original trial, at issue will be the specific question of the ownership of such intangibles as the names \u201cBratz\u201d and \u201cJade,\u201d one of the first-generation dolls, and whether the employment agreement properly entitles Mattel to the inventions that the designer conceived of during his off-hours on nights and weekends.<\/p>\n We shall follow this “new” case with interest;\u00a0\u00a0Bryant v. Mattel, 04-09049, U.S. District Court, Central District of California (Santa Ana).<\/p>\n