Plastic, Programmed, and Potentially Problematic: The Legal Curveball of AI Barbie

From plastic to digital, the “AI Barbie” trend has surged in popularity across social media platforms, captivating users with the ability to generate AI-created images, videos, and avatars inspired by the iconic Barbie brand. Characterised by a distinctly pink aesthetic, stylized makeup, glamorous fashion, and playful accessories, this phenomenon leverages generative AI technologies to transform personal likenesses into highly customized digital dolls. This is reminiscent of the precedent trend of replicating the Studio Ghibli aesthetic, evoking the iconic works of Hayao Miyazaki, using tools like OpenAI and ChatGPT-4o.

To engage with these trends, users typically upload personal photographs into AI platforms or mobile applications. Using prompt-based inputs, they instruct the AI on specific visual elements they wish to include, such as the doll’s outfit, accessories, occupation, packaging style, and thematic design elements. These user-generated prompts guide the AI in producing personalised, Barbie-themed content, raising important questions related to copyright, data privacy, energy usage, AI governance and brand ownership.

Mattel, Inc. Corporation holds comprehensive intellectual property rights to the Barbie brand, including registered trademarks, copyrights, design and patents, and strategic digital protections such as registered internet domain names.

As such, any reproduction, adaptation, or commercial use of Barbie’s likeness - particularly in derivative works - may constitute intellectual property (IP) infringement. This includes AI-generated content that replicates or imitates Barbie’s name, visual identity, or signature style.

Businesses, influencers, and content creators using AI to produce Barbie-like avatars or branded content for commercial purposes - such as social media promotions, digital advertising, or merchandise - may be infringing on Mattel’s IP rights.

Such unauthorised use not only risks legal consequences but may also dilute or compromise the integrity of the Barbie brand.

In the US, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Endorsement Guidelines are explicit in requiring influencers to disclose when promoting Barbie-themed content, including AI-generated Barbie selfies. Influencers must make clear disclosures when they:

• Receive compensation or free access to paid applications

• Use affiliate links or promotional codes

• Share content that could mislead consumers into believing it is authorized by Mattel, the rightful copyright holder of Barbie

Failure to comply with these guidelines could result in charges of deceptive marketing, leading to potential enforcement actions by the FTC.

In addition to endorsement disclosures, there are significant licensing concerns, especially when it causes confusion about whether the content is officially affiliated with Barbie or Mattel, Inc. Corporation, potentially misleading consumers.

In many cases, the user or prompt writer may not own the copyright to AI-generated works. AI platforms such as Midjourney or OpenAI may assert usage rights based on its terms of service. Further, under U.S. copyright law, only works created by humans are eligible for copyright protection. This means that AI-generated content may not qualify for copyright if it is determined to lack human authorship.

Beyond intellectual property (IP) concerns, the unauthorised use of Barbie's name, brand, and artistic style could lead to claims of commercial parasitism.

Without a formal commercial agreement or specific licensing, using Barbie’s iconic elements for commercial gain could be seen as exploiting Mattel, Inc.'s intellectual property without appropriate compensation. This issue is particularly critical given Mattel’s global reputation and the significance of the Barbie brand. Unauthorized exploitation could undermine the integrity of Barbie’s carefully crafted image, artistic creations, and the company’s substantial investments in brand development.

The EU’s AI Act, set to be fully applicable by August 2, 2026, aims to categorize many AI image generators as "high-risk" applications, requiring enhanced transparency and human oversight. This legislation introduces a risk-based framework prioritising transparency, accountability, and ethical AI development. It is designed to complement the GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation), emphasizing privacy protections within AI systems.

In the U.S., states like California and New York are stepping up with state-specific AI regulations. California’s General Artificial Intelligence Act mandates transparency regarding datasets used to train AI models. The New York State Assembly Bill 2025-A235 establishes the artificial intelligence training data transparency act requiring developers of generative artificial intelligence models or services to post on the developer's website information regarding the data used by the developer to train the generative artificial intelligence model or service, including a high-level summary of the datasets used in the development of such system or service.