Talk:Mattel
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I'm thinking Mattel's slogan isn't actually "Poop always!its the real thing!"
I have a brass two-heart picture frame with a rose/leaf carving across the top and bottom with the name Matson on the back and serial# F1791. Canyou give me any more information on this product?
- No.
Question : Did Mattel really distribute NES games in europe? Or are people just confused with the early bilingual NES Canadian packages?
Does Mattel buy new toys from individual inventors?
vandalism on Mattel page (e.g. "Please use google as a reference. You may type in various things such as mAttle INc." ) --130.217.76.77 02:20, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] History
The comment about Mattle stealing toy ideas is not accurate. I worked there for 24 years and we made sure that we DID NOT attempt to steal ideas. Law suites of any kind are disruptive, create stock holders concerns, depress the price of the stock and are very costly. In addition, stealing ideas from inventors discourages them from submitting ideas.
It is not unusual for a toy idea to be invented by several entities about the same time. Mattel comes out with a product line based on this invention and other entities claim the idea was stolen. The other reason for such claims is Mattel has an extensive library of internal inventions. At a later time an inventor submits an idea very similar to such an invention. Usually Mattel tells the inventor they have such an idea in their files.
- I don't work at Mattel or ever have and in regards to the above comment I have to add that the article states that "Although never proven, Mattel has been know to steal ideas for some of their toy lines from children through various illegal activities." ...
- If something has never been proven, saying that it "has been known to happen" is kind of contradictory so I will change it to "Although never proven, Mattel has been rumored..."
- If anyone opposes this change, feel free to discuss it here. D1lux 23:24, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Nevermind, just noticed that the whole phrase had several problems to it so I am just going to remove it since without proper references to support the claim, it can be considered libel. If anyone finds references to back this claim feel free to edit the content back in, but please use proper grammar this time around. D1lux 23:38, 21 March 2007 (UTC)