Sunday, July 20, 2008

Of Bratz and Barbies

Interesting jury decision on the Bratz versus Barbie actual design dates fiascoe.
Read all about it here here here and here .
I'm not sure I understand the charges against MGA and Issac Larian = "tortious interference with Mr Bryants contract with Mattel ; both aided and abetted Mr Bryants breach of the duty of loyalty to Mattle".
Was Mr. Bryant actually working with MGA during the same pay period he was working for Mattel.
I'm all for 100% loyalty to the company thats paying you to design and create, but isnt this a little beyond the call of duty during paid business hours especially with designers ?
It's not clear if the designs were actually worked on during work hours or during hours Mr. Bryant was paid to design for Mattel.
Even if Bryant invented the doll while on the Mattel payroll, it's not clear how this renders the design Mattels and not Bryants ?
Its also not clear why this would be considered stealing the idea for the Bratz doll from Mattle ie through a deal with the designer Bryant ?
I'm curious what the actual contract wording is specifically with regards to 24/7 design loyalty .
What does Mattel mean when they say Bryant designed the dolls during the time he was on the Mattel payroll ?
Four designs were clearly worked on during the time he was not employed at Mattel.
I wonder if the "Evidence Eliminator" fun fact misled the jury or at the very least instilled the very foundations of definite doubt .
I've come to understand recently that there are no limits to the kinds of disputes and misrepresentations that can arise and or are ignored during trial time.
Sometimes the conclusions are even more astonishing than the questions themselves.
The Judge allowed the jury to hear the evidence with regards to program "Evidence Eliminator" being used on the personal computer of defendant , designer Bryant .
The Judge declined to get involved in the dispute involving a exclusive access contract between one set of lawyers and a hotel that did not allow for the booking of rooms by the opposing team due to concerns that sensitive documents would get delivered to the wrong lawyers !
I hear it can be really fun sharing the same hotel with opposing counsel .

No comments: