Mattel v. Bratz: Someone needs a timeout

OK. I’ll admit it. I’ve begun to see work as a sanctuary from home. (I guess that’s what happens when you live in a house with three young kids!) Then I started receiving updates on my work computer about Mattel v. Bratz, one of the most publicized legal battles to threaten the retail industry in more than a decade, and suddenly my view of the workplace—not to mention my view of the legal system—started to change.

Now, I don’t mean this as a dis to either party, because I know the stakes are still quite serious. But when I first began reading about Mattel’s case against Bratz owner MGA Entertainment, I have to admit, it felt a lot like a bunch of six year olds squabbling.

This copyright infringement case reached a crescendo last week when a Riverside, Calif., jury awarded Mattel the equivalent of $100 million in damages. And just when it looked as though there may be a semblance of closure to this case, both parties began a public fight over what really happened in that courthouse. Did the jury award Mattel $100 million in damages? Were the damages awarded to Mattel actually three $30 million non-duplicative counts? Could there be more damages down the road—even an injunction to stop MGA from producing the Bratz line altogether?

But speculation, as you know, is child’s play—frankly, this whole case reeks of juvenile bickering. I mean, can anyone tell me how we really got here? How did these two parties reach a point that jeopardizes the business of so many companies? (After all, if MGA built Bratz into a billion-dollar brand, as this case alleges, didn’t it do so on the backs of countless vendor partners—all of whom stand to lose should the house of Bratz meet its demise?)

Most troubling of all, I can’t understand why it’s taken Mattel the better part of the last decade to pursue legal action. Would Mattel be reacting with such fervor had the Bratz line not grown into the billion-dollar empire it is today?

And what about MGA ceo Isaac Larian, with his e-mail rants about the inequities of the case? (His latest was, “Memorable Quotes From The MGA Closing Arguments.”) If you’ve ever wondered why judges impose gag orders, you don’t need to look much further than Larian’s postings on the MGA Web site ( www.mgae.com ).

What I’d tell both these parties, if given the chance, is what I tell my kids when things get out of hand (as they have here). It’s starting to sound like someone needs a timeout!