色盒直播

You Don鈥檛 Own Me: How Mattel v. MGA Entertainment Exposed Barbie鈥檚 Dark Side, by Orly Lobel

Book of the week: An intellectual property battle over two dolls puts the focus on market competition, Laura Frost finds

Published on
January 18, 2018
Last updated
January 18, 2018
Two Barbies in boxing ring
Source: Getty

Long before Safe and Carol, director Todd Haynes made a聽43-minute biopic about the singer Karen Carpenter, who died of anorexia at 32. In Superstar: The Karen Carpenter Story (1988), he recreates her rise to fame and descent into starvation, staging the drama with Barbie dolls. As Carpenter wastes away, her already thin Barbie avatar becomes ever more skeletal. Barbie鈥檚 maker, the toy behemoth Mattel, was not happy about Superstar and warned Haynes about copyright infringement, but the matter never escalated because another entity was preparing to take him to court. Haynes hadn鈥檛 bothered to get the Carpenter estate鈥檚 permission for his soundtrack. Thus, Superstar鈥檚 scenes of Barbie 鈥 America鈥檚 sweetheart 鈥 purging and starving never saw commercial release.

Barbie, who debuted in 1959, is one of the most successful doll franchises in history and also one of the most controversial. Whether criticised for her improbably bodacious figure or her vapid white superficiality, Barbie has had more than her share of detractors. Chief Judge Alex Kozinski summed it up when adjudicating Mattel鈥檚 2000 lawsuit against MCA Records over the song Barbie Girl by the Danish-Norwegian band Aqua. Barbie, Kozinski wrote, 鈥渉as been labeled both the ideal American woman and a bimbo鈥ith Barbie, Mattel created not just a聽toy but a cultural icon.鈥

It鈥檚 the fight to preserve Barbie鈥檚 fame, reputation and profitability that Orly Lobel tracks in her captivating book You Don鈥檛 Own Me. A professor of law at the University of San Diego, she meticulously documents 鈥渢he longest, most heated litigation in the doll-eat-doll toy industry鈥. MGA鈥檚 2001 launch of a new doll, Bratz, led to a decade of tumultuous litigation, with Mattel complaining of a 鈥渞ival-led Barbie genocide鈥.

You Don鈥檛 Own Me is an extended case study that鈥檚 fascinating and consequential thanks to Lobel鈥檚 storytelling skill. Through her descriptions of flamboyant personalities and outrageous corporate scheming, she elevates the story of a protracted legal case into a page-turner that holds up a聽lipstick-pink mirror to both American consumer culture and corporate misbehaviour.

色盒直播

ADVERTISEMENT

You Don鈥檛 Own Me begins with the birth story of Bratz. In 1998, a Mattel designer named Carter Bryant took a year鈥檚 leave of absence. Inspired by the imaginative style of high school students, he sketched a series of feisty, playfully cartoonish, multi-ethnic dolls with oversized heads and feet, huge eyes and bulbous lips. Bratz wore edgy urban clothes, not the stiff ball gowns and matching miniskirt sets that Barbie preferred. Barbie鈥檚 vanilla Aryan frigidity was no match for Bryant鈥檚 funky 鈥淔rankenBratz鈥.

When Bryant returned to Mattel, he cut a deal with MGA Entertainment to produce Bratz. The timing couldn鈥檛 have been better. 鈥淎 new generation of girls were no longer interested in playing with Barbie,鈥 Lobel writes, and sales were declining. As a result, 鈥淏ratz sales grew from 97聽million dollars in 2001 to 1聽billion dollars by the end of 2003鈥. The ageing 鈥渋ce queen鈥, as聽Lobel repeatedly refers to Barbie, 鈥渨as suddenly dethroned by a modern, voluptuous, multiethnic doll鈥.

色盒直播

ADVERTISEMENT

Mattel slapped MGA with a $500聽million (拢368.7聽million) lawsuit claiming that Bryant鈥檚 labour belonged to Mattel. Like most employees in US corporations, reports Lobel, Bryant was 鈥渘ever paid any royalties for his designs鈥 at Mattel beyond his base salary. She explains that while other countries oblige corporations to give employees a聽share of the profits their inventions generate, US law is anomalous in requiring 鈥渘o reward for employee-inventors鈥.

Here Lobel backtracks to tell Barbie鈥檚 own shady history: 鈥淥nce upon a time, Barbie was a聽German hooker.鈥 In 1956, Ruth Handler, the wife of a Mattel co-founder, was travelling in Germany and discovered a sexy doll called Bild Lilli, based on a risqu茅 gold-digging cartoon character. Handler smuggled several Bild Lillis back to the US and persuaded Mattel to produce knock-offs. Barbie, claims Lobel, was 鈥渢he first mass-manufactured adult-looking doll for girls鈥 in the US. Yet the similarities with the German doppelg盲nger were unmistakable, and 鈥渙wnership over Barbie was contested from her launch鈥. Mattel bought off Bild Lilli鈥檚 German patent holder, and the rest is history. As Lobel comments, 鈥淛ust as the most jealous lovers are often the most unfaithful, Mattel鈥檚 beginnings are unmistakably tainted by an intellectual property dispute.鈥

Mattel took pains to present Barbie 鈥渁s a role model鈥, having an active life (getting her hair done, making ice cream) and boasting 鈥渕ore than 150 careers on her resume鈥, including nurse, rock star, cupcake chef, veterinarian, aerobics instructor and police officer, serving as an 鈥渁gent of change for girls鈥, according to Mattel鈥檚 website. Shedding Bild Lilli鈥檚 slutty image, Lobel writes, Barbie 鈥渂ecame the icon of the me聽generation鈥.

In the course of her book, Lobel schools her readers on the ins and outs of patent law, copyright infringement, fair use and how US courts seek to balance ownership against the First Amendment right to free speech. Legally, she explains, 鈥測ou can use a copyrighted work without the owner鈥檚 permission if the use is for a 鈥榯ransformative鈥 purpose, such as to comment upon, criticize, or parody the work鈥. More specifically, 鈥渢he courts have decided that parody is fair use but satire is not鈥. So 叠补谤产颈别听骋颈谤濒 was deemed fair use, as was 厂迟补谤听叠补濒濒锄, a pornographic parody of Star Wars, to the consternation of LucasFilm.

The first federal jury trial of the Barbie versus Bratz saga, in 2008, concluded that Mattel owned Bryant鈥檚 labour. Two years later, however, Kozinski, a judge of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, struck down that ruling. Lobel鈥檚 account of this part of the case is聽stellar, with deft explanations of聽contract and copyright law, as聽well as a lively sketch of the 鈥渃olorful鈥 Kozinski, whom she calls 鈥淎merica鈥檚 champion of free culture鈥, with a wicked sense of humour.

Kozinski remanded the case back to the federal district court for a second jury trial. This time things went MGA鈥檚 way. Mattel鈥檚 bad behaviour, such as bullying its competitors and illegal corporate espionage at toy fairs, came to light. 鈥淏arbie does not 鈥榩lay nice鈥 with others (particularly her competitors),鈥 MGA lawyers told the jury.

色盒直播

ADVERTISEMENT

Finally, MGA prevailed, but the moment was hardly victorious. After 10 vicious and expensive years in court, Lobel concludes, 鈥渆veryone lost鈥 鈥 especially Carter Bryant, the inventor of Bratz, who recedes further and further from the product for which he was responsible.

Ultimately, You Don鈥檛 Own Me is less about Barbie鈥檚 cultural significance than the landscape of US free market competition and intellectual property law. In the book鈥檚 epilogue, Lobel moves away from toyland: 鈥淲e, as a society, have a choice. We can choose to promote market dynamism or to permit a market of concentrated power. We can create shared spaces for creativity or allow a handful of companies to hoard cultural imagery.鈥 Lobel points to a few companies that are making innovation more rewarding for employees, but when she asks 鈥淒oes the current hyper-protection of intellectual property promote more innovation or perversely impede it?鈥 it鈥檚 clear that she鈥檚 in favour of giving credit where credit is due.

色盒直播

ADVERTISEMENT

Despite having lost her edge, Barbie still makes the news, as when Mattel last year produced a聽Barbie based on Muslim Olympic fencer Ibtihaj Muhammad, complete with hijab. And Mattel鈥檚 Career of the Year Barbie never fails to get media attention.

Since Lobel鈥檚 book has been published, there鈥檚 been more news about the players in the drama. Just last month, Kozinski abruptly resigned when at least 15 women accused him of sexual misconduct. Perhaps the Barbie Career of the Year for 2018 should be Discrimination Attorney: 鈥#MeToo Barbie鈥? It鈥檚 time to make Barbie a real role model.

Laura Frost is a writer and cultural critic who was formerly a聽professor of literature at both Yale University and The New School in New York. She is also the author of The Problem with Pleasure: Modernism and Its Discontents (2015).


You Don鈥檛 Own Me:聽How Mattel v. MGA Entertainment Exposed Barbie鈥檚 Dark Side
By Orly Lobel
Norton, 304pp, 拢20.00
ISBN 9780393254075
Published 2 January 2018


Orly Lobel

The author

Orly Lobel, professor of law at the University of San Diego, was born in Tel Aviv. She studied law at Tel Aviv University then clerked at the Israeli Supreme Court before going on to doctoral studies at Harvard Law School and a聽fellowship at Harvard鈥檚 Kennedy School of Government. Studying the law in two countries, she believes, 鈥渁llowed me to be more critical of our legal systems, understanding intuitively that our regulations are neither natural nor apolitical鈥.

While still young, Lobel recalls, she 鈥渋nadvertently became a feminist critic of the toy industry鈥hen my mother, who is a renowned psychology professor, filmed me in her research videos playing with stereotypical boy toys (trucks, Lego) and girl toys (Barbie, tiaras) and showed these videos around the world to study gender development鈥.

In her recent work, Lobel has set out to tell 鈥渃ompelling鈥 stories 鈥渢hat make my research and academic arguments accessible to a聽broader audience. We are all impacted by the laws of work [and] contracts concerning ownership over ideas, but most of us don鈥檛 think about how these affect our lives till things go terribly wrong鈥he courtroom drama and cinematic quality of [the Bratz intellectual property dispute] made it聽perfect for the book 鈥 it鈥檚 an entertaining legal thriller, but also a聽true story that teaches us about markets, culture and how innovation happens in creative settings.

色盒直播

ADVERTISEMENT

鈥淚ntellectual property was enacted for a purpose,鈥 Lobel continues. 鈥淪ince the early British laws on patent, copyright, trademark and trade secrets, there was an understanding that the goal was to promote progress in arts and science by granting temporary monopolies over knowledge. But if the goals are subverted by excessive definitions of what ideas can be owned and the law can be used as a sledgehammer against new competition, we need to place limits on these laws.鈥

Matthew Reisz

POSTSCRIPT:

Print headline:聽When babes in toyland lawyer up

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Related articles

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT