Mattel Throws Protective Arm Around Barbie

Barbie is at the center of a not-very-pretty legal fight by Mattel Inc. against a collector’s magazine.

The El Segundo-based toy company has accused Miller’s, a quarterly publication for Barbie fans, of using the doll’s name and image without permission. A lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles earlier this month alleges trademark and copyright infringement and seeks unspecified damages.

“We are absolutely going to fight this,” said Dan Miller, who produces the magazine from his Spokane home with his wife, Barbara.

The 5-year-old publication, rich with stylish photos of vintage Barbies, has a circulation of about 40,000. Besides such laudatory features as “Hair, Hair and More Hair,” about wigs for Barbie, the magazine reviews the quality of Barbie dolls and prices, collected from a team of stringers around the country.

The suit struck a sour note among collectors, who use the magazine to obtain objective information about the hundreds of incarnations of Barbie. Miller’s competes with Barbie Bazaar, a magazine that is published under license from Mattel. The toy maker reviews the contents of Barbie Bazaar before publication.

“They want to corner the market in reproducing any image or information about the product. I don’t see how a hobby can exist if a manufacturer can do that,” said Fontana collector Melissa Pitman.

Mattel declined to comment on the suit, filed April 3.

The suit is part of an effort by Mattel to change the way Barbie is being treated, even by those who love her. Over the last two years, Mattel forced retailers to stop using Barbie in store names. The company in late 1995 revoked an agreement it had with Bay Area hobbyist Sandi Holder, forcing her to change the name of her business to Doll Attic from Barbie Attic.

“Not only that, I had to pay to change all my stationery and business cards,” Holder complained.

Collectors say the suit against Miller’s represents another public relations black eye for Mattel. An oversupply of recent limited edition Barbies has pushed down prices, angering collectors who paid high premiums.

Take the “Star Trek” Barbie, issued last fall at a retail price of about $70. Within months, hobbyists said, the price had been cut by half, and the doll was being sold in discount stores.

Hobbyists said that a limited edition Barbie wearing Calvin Klein clothing encountered a similar fate.

Mattel spokeswoman Lisa McKendall confirmed that the toy company has overestimated the market for its collectible dolls, leading to drastic cuts in prices. But she said Mattel has reduced the number of collectible Barbies 15% this year to avoid a repeat of the problem.

McKendall said that Mattel is forming an advisory committee of collectors to stay better in touch with Barbies’ biggest fans.

“We really value our collectors and we are listening to them,” she said.

Mattel estimates there are 100,000 avid Barbie collectors.

A former advertising executive with U.S. West, Miller started publishing Miller’s five years ago, inspired by his wife’s Barbie collection. Besides the magazine, the couple puts out a monthly newspaper and an annual price guide. The publications have been available at high-end toy stores such as FAO Schwarz, as well as the corporate store at Mattel’s headquarters, he said.

In the suit, Mattel accused the Millers of marketing a song about the doll, “The Barbie Anthem,” without permission. It also accused the magazine of printing disparaging remarks about Barbie, which it didn’t specify.

Miller said he “heard indirectly” that Mattel was displeased with a photo spread in the winter edition that showed Barbie in tennis garb with a pack of Virginia Slims cigarettes. An accompanying story said Mattel excised the unauthorized photo from an approved Barbie guide written by Los Angeles Barbie dealer Joe Blitman.

“They never told me, but I heard that upset them,” Miller said.