When Is It Idea Theft? A Mattel TV Adaptation Trial Could Be a Case Study

As a long-time fan of reality competition shows and someone who has followed the tumultuous journey of “The Toy Box” with great interest, I must say that this recent court ruling comes as a bit of a relief.

Mattel was not found guilty by the jury of taking the idea for their reality competition show, “The Toy Box,” from a producer who claimed they copied his concept for a similar series he proposed.

The ruling was made following a 10-week trial in Santa Monica that centered around the guidelines for safeguarding original ideas and when a business might be liable for pursuing an idea presented by multiple creators. In a verdict potentially dissuasive to other artists contemplating lawsuits over intellectual property infringement, a jury of 12 individuals on Thursday dismissed Norton Herrick’s claim for over $46 million in unrealized profits he aimed to recover from Mattel.

In 2014, Herrick proposed the concept for “Playmakers,” a reality show where inventors present their toys to young judges, aiming to make it to the final round. The victor would receive both a cash award and a deal with Mattel for manufacturing and distribution of the winning toy.

Herrick filed a lawsuit following the company’s creation of a comparable concept on “The Toy Box,” which aired on ABC for two seasons in 2017. He claimed breach of an implied contract, fraud, and misappropriation of trade secrets. Essentially, he argued that Mattel deceived him by saying they were still interested in his pitch to stop him from presenting the idea to other companies before they launched their own version of the show.

On Thursday, the jury’s decision suggested they concurred with Herrick that a contract existed between him and Mattel, yet they did not find that Mattel violated this agreement. Furthermore, they dismissed claims that the details shared with the company were innovative, confidential, or qualified as trade secrets.

During the 10-week court case, Mattel’s defense mainly focused on the claim that the concept behind Playmakers was common or generic. Larry Iser, representing Mattel, informed the jury that this idea was not unique but rather widely known and circulating in the television and toy industries for quite some time, as suggested by the trial transcript.

In 2014, another production company proposed a pitch to Mattel for a reality show analogous to what they called “The Toy Job“. Interestingly, Mattel received multiple proposals for this concept, many of which were submitted in the same year that Herrick was negotiating with Mattel executives regarding his own show.

Producers for The Toy Box denied ever receiving information about Herrick’s show.

The jury chose not to conclude that Mattel had misled Bryan Freedman and Miles Feldman, producers for the films “2 Guns” and “Lone Survivor”, regarding their involvement with Playmakers, as they claimed.

In the court case, Mattel claimed they decided against pursuing Herrick’s proposal because Phil Gurin, a producer on Shark Tank, ended his involvement with the project. According to Iser, who mentioned that Mattel wasn’t familiar with Herrick as he had no television production background at the time, the reason they even considered the meeting was solely due to Gurin’s participation, not because of any other project like Playmakers.

In an attempt to weaken Herrick’s claim of approximately $46 million in profits from “The Toy Box”, Mattel argued that the show was essentially unsuccessful, suggesting that Playmakers may not have performed any differently under the same circumstances.

“The Toy Box was a flop,” Iser said. “It was canceled after two seasons.”

As reported by the company, Mattel suffered approximately an $8 million loss due to their involvement in the event.

2024-08-06 23:55

Read More