Carter Bryant got the name BRATZ(R) from Mattel because at one time Mattel wanted to name their Diva Starz (Mattel (TM)) line 'Brats.'

Fact:

-- Mattel has not sued MGA for trademark infringement and has not asserted any claim against the "BRATZ" name, which is the exclusive worldwide trademark of MGA.

-- The Bratz(R) name has been in the marketplace since 1994. It was the name of children's clothing brand. The Bratz(R) name was registered to Curt Lovins who assigned it to MGA in 2002. In fact, Mr. Lovins' Bratz clothing is currently sold exclusively at Costco.

-- Ivy Ross, who was Mattel's SVP of Product Design of the Girls Division when Carter Bryant was employed there, testified during trial that there was no reason for Bryant to have been included on a distribution list that discussed the potential use of the name 'Brats.'

-- Jill Nordquist, a Mattel Director who worked and met with Carter Bryant everyday when he was employed at Mattel, testified that she never knew Mattel considered the name 'Brats' for Diva Starz.

-- Mattel has never used the name 'Brats' or 'Bratz,' because they cannot. It belongs to MGA.

Mattel:

MGA and Isaac Larian concealed Bratz(R) and Carter Bryant's involvement with the brand.

Fact:

-- In October 2000, Jill Nordquist of Mattel testified that she suspected Carter Bryant was going to work for a competitor

-- In December 2000, MGA disclosed to large retailers that Carter Bryant was the designer of the Bratz drawings, which would serve as the inspiration for the creation of the Bratz dolls

-- In January 2001 at the Hong Kong Toy Fair, MGA invited Mateo Romano, Mattel's Director for Latin America, to the MGA showroom in Hong Kong. He attended and MGA showed him all of the Bratz prototypes and the drawings. (Trial Exhibit 00911-01)

-- Mattel's representative from Latin America took pictures of MGA's showroom, Bratz prototypes and Bratz drawings.

-- Mateo Romano and his boss were later invited to MGA's booth at the New York Toy Fair in February, 2001 to see the further development of the Bratz line. At that time, Mattel Latin America was asked to consider being the distributor of Bratz in Latin America. (Trial Exhibit 16925-001)

-- Mateo Romano of Mattel wrote in an email to Martin Hitch of MGA saying "I regret to inform you that this year (Mattel) will not be carrying any product from MGA; the reason is because some products are very similar to our own concepts and this is a very sensitive issue with the brand groups (Bratz and Samantha)...."(Exhibit 16935-001)

-- In February 2001, Mattel employees attending the Tokyo Toy Fair shot a video of the Bratz display and drawings, which were openly presented at the Toy Fair. They titled the video "Here Come the Bratz" and sent it to Mattel headquarters.

-- MGA publicly advertised Bratz and the drawings in 2001 New York Toy Fair publications such as The Toy Book and Toy Fair News.

-- Jill Nordquist testified that she and other employees at Mattel, including Ann Parduchi (a Senior VP) knew by summer 2001 that Carter Bryant was the designer of Bratz.

-- In 2002 MGA openly filed copyright applications for drawings of the Bratz dolls in Brazil, which identified Carter Bryant as the author. Mattel obtained those registrations from Brazil. (EXHIBIT 1703-0001).

-- In 2002, Carter Bryant was disclosed as the designer of the Bratz drawings on a publicly available Yahoo-Bratz Fan website.

-- In 2003 MGA openly told The Wall Street Journal that Carter Bryant was the designer behind the Bratz drawings. Mattel, in the same article, didn't reveal who the designer was of its failed Flava (Mattel (TM)) dolls or My Scene (Mattel (TM)) dolls.

-- In August 2003, Mattel's Bob Eckert received an anonymous letter which advised him that Carter Bryant was the creator of Bratz and had worked with MGA

-- Mattel claims it "lost" its October 2000 phone records for Carter Bryant, which would have revealed what contact Bryant may have had with MGA in his last month of employment with Mattel

Mattel:

The key reason and "core" of the success of the Bratz brand are Carter Bryant's drawings that the jury found belongs to Mattel. These drawings are "similar" to what Lilli Martinez, Mattel's Senior Manager of Product Design, drew at Mattel called Toon Teens.

Fact:

-- As noted by Mattel's lawyer in closing argument: there have only been two successful fashion dolls: Barbie and Bratz. However, Mattel and others have introduced many fashion dolls over the years that have failed - despite the existence of good concept drawings

-- If the Bratz(R) success was based solely on Bryant's concept drawings, why didn't Mattel's My Scene (Mattel (TM)) fashion doll, an imitation of Bratz done by Lilli Martinez two years after Bratz, succeed and why is it no longer sold in the US? The same applies to Mattel's Flavas (Mattel (TM)) and Diva Starz (Mattel (TM)) fashion dolls which failed to effectively compete with Bratz - and by Mattel's lawyer's admission were not successful

-- If that was true, Mattel would have sued for copyright infringement based on Toon Teens but they did not and Toon Teens is not part of this case.

-- If that's the case, why are Mattel's 3-D interpretations of Lilli Martinez' 2- D drawings of Toon Teens are so different from MGA's 3-D (doll) interpretation of Carter Bryant's 2-D drawings?

-- If the Bratz success was based solely on Carter Bryant's drawings, why didn't Mattel's My Scene (Mattel (TM)) brand, an imitation of Bratz done by Lilli Martinez two years after Bratz, succeed and why is it no longer sold in the US?

-- Why did Mattel's Flavaz (Mattel (TM)) line of dolls with pouty lips, big head, big eyes, small nose, and big shoes, supported by all the might of Mattel, the biggest toy company in the world, fail?

-- The creativity that MGA's employees applied to the Bratz brand after 2001 was a key factor in producing dolls that girls would want to buy in order to add to their collection of Bratz dolls.

Mattel:

Bratz dolls are "substantially similar" to Carter Bryant's drawings.

Fact:

-- Mattel offered no witness at trial who took this position.

-- Lilli Martinez, Mattel's corporate representative in this trial stated, "You can't compare 2-D drawings with 3-D (models)."

-- If all of MGA's Bratz dolls are "substantially similar" to Carter Bryant's drawings, why do they bother and make new dolls with new themes every year?

-- During closing arguments, Kennedy put it best : "Can you see a parent saying to their child, 'Why do you want that? You have a 'substantially similar' doll back home."

For more information and facts please check www.mgae.com

SOURCE: MGA Entertainment, Inc.

Silver Public Relations
David Silver, 213-488-6161
info@silverpr.com

MGA said that the jury made its award pursuant to a variety of legal claims, each based on the same damages theory, and subject to the Court's instruction not to be concerned about duplicative damages. MGA pointed out that during the trial Mattel even conceded that the damages it sought were overlapping and duplicative.

MGA further stated that it intends to appeal any amount of awarded damages at the end of the case.

"We are pleased to have this trial behind us," said Isaac Larian, CEO of MGA Entertainment. "We can now concentrate all of our energies on what we do best - providing dolls and other toys that are the consumers' first choice."

SOURCE: MGA Entertainment

Silver Public Relations 
David Silver, 213-488-6161 
info@silverpr.com

"Mattel has pursued this case first and foremost as a matter of principle," said Robert A. Eckert, chairman and chief executive officer of Mattel, Inc. "We have an obligation to defend ourselves against competitors who choose to engage in fraudulent activities against us. We're pleased that the jury agreed with Mattel that what MGA did was wrong and that damages were awarded."

Mattel's counsel, John Quinn, added, "After carefully weighing nearly three months of testimony and evidence, the jury arrived at a unanimous and undeniable conclusion that MGA engaged in illegal business practices."

Mattel was represented by Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges, LLP, a 400-strong lawyer business litigation firm -- the largest in the United States devoted solely to business litigation. The litigation team was led by John Quinn, founder and managing partner at the firm, and partners Bill Price and Mike Zeller. The trial of Mattel, Inc. v MGA Entertainment, Inc. began on May 27, 2008, in United States Court of the Central District of California in Riverside, Calif., and was presided by the Honorable Stephen G. Larson, United States District Judge.

About Mattel

Mattel, Inc., (NYSE: MAT)(www.mattel.com) is the worldwide leader in the design, manufacture and marketing of toys and family products.The Mattel family is comprised of such best-selling brands as Barbie(R), the most popular fashion doll ever introduced, Hot Wheels(R), Matchbox(R), American Girl(R), Radica(R) and Tyco(R) R/C, as well as Fisher-Price(R) brands, including Little People(R), Power Wheels(R) and a wide array of entertainment-inspired toy lines. Mattel is recognized as one of 2008's "100 Best Companies to Work For" by FORTUNE Magazine and as 2008's Best Places to Work by Los Angeles Business Journal. With global headquarters in El Segundo, Calif., Mattel employs more than 30,000 people in 43 countries and territories and sells products in more than 150 nations. Mattel donates more than 2 percent of its pretax profit to global philanthropic efforts which include the Mattel Children's Foundation. Mattel's vision is to be the world's premier toy brands -- today and tomorrow.

MAT-Corp

SOURCE: Mattel, Inc.

Mattel, Inc. 
Jules Andres, 310-252-3529 
Jules.Andres@mattel.com

Another 10 million U.S. dollars was assessed for copyright infringement.

"Mattel has pursued this case first and foremost as a matter of principle," said Mattel Chief Executive Robert Eckert in a statement. "We're pleased that the jury agreed with Mattel that what MGA did was wrong and that damages were awarded."

However, the total amount of 100 million dollars is significantly less than the almost 2 billion dollars sought by Mattel attorneys from the defendants. A judge will make a final determination regarding the total damages award later.

Mattel and the MGA have been in court since May battling over the lawsuit, in which Mattel argues that the MGA's Bratz dolls were based on drawings made by designer Bryant when he was still a Mattel employee.

Bratz dolls have been popular among teen and preteen girls in the United States since they hit the market in 2001. The doll franchise eventually spun off other entertainment products like games, music albums, feature films and even a successful television series.