UPDATE: T.I. & Tiny’s $71 Million Award Upheld In OMG Girlz Lawsuit Against Toymaker MGA

T.I. & Tiny Harris

UPDATE: T.I. & Tiny’s $71 Million Award Upheld In OMG Girlz Lawsuit Against Toymaker MGA

Update (Feb. 4, 2025): A California judge just handed T.I. and Tiny a major legal victory.

After previously considering slashing the $53.6 million punitive damages awarded to the former teen pop group OMG Girlz, Judge James V. Selna changed course and left the entire $71 million judgment intact.

The court documents read,

“Upon consideration of the evidence, the Court grants disgorgement of profits of $17,872,252 under common law misappropriation and affirms the jury’s award of punitive damages of $53,616,759.”

The jury found that MGA Entertainment Inc., best known for its “Bratz” dolls, had misappropriated the “name, likeness, and identity” of OMG Girlz and infringed on the group’s “trade dress.”

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by the Jasmine BRAND (@thejasminebrand)

VIA: @meghanncuniff

Original Story (Jan. 6, 2025): A jury initially ordered toymaker MGA Entertainment to pay T.I. and Tiny Harris a staggering $71.4 million, ruling that its popular LOL Surprise! OMG Dolls infringed on the trade dress of the OMG Girlz, a group originally featuring their daughter Zonnique Pullins.

The decision marked a significant victory for the Harrises, who argued that MGA wrongfully capitalized on the OMG Girlz’ unique aesthetic.

However, a federal judge has now called for a drastic reduction in the verdict. The judge proposed slashing $53.6 million in punitive damages, citing insufficient evidence of bad faith on MGA’s part. This would cut the overall award down to $17.8 million—compensatory damages only—significantly weakening the original financial blow to the toymaker.

The case has drawn widespread attention for its intersection of intellectual property law and cultural influence, with T.I. and Tiny Harris alleging the dolls were a direct copy of the OMG Girlz’ distinctive style. While the jury agreed, the judge’s intervention signals a more cautious approach to the punitive damages awarded.

For now, the final outcome remains pending.T