A South Carolina mom filed a category motion lawsuit on behalf of herself and “all others equally located” in opposition to Barbie toy firm Mattel after her daughter visited the pornographic web site marketed on the packaging of toys from the “Depraved” film.
As a substitute of directing the younger product customers to WickedMovie.com, the movie’s official webpage, the package deal learn Depraved.com, a hardcore porn website. This uncovered some youngsters to “hardcore, full on nude pornographic photographs depicting precise intercourse,” the lawsuit states.
This left the plaintiff and her minor daughter “horrified” when the daughter confirmed her the pictures.
The toys are really useful and marketed for youngsters ages 4 and older.
The cinematic interpretation of Depraved, the Broadway prequel to The Wizard of Oz, premiered in theaters on November 22, 2024.
As The Gateway Pundit reported on November 10, weeks earlier than the incident occurred, dad and mom had been sounding the alarm and warning different dad and mom to not purchase the toys for his or her youngsters after discovering that the doll’s packaging contained the pornographic hyperlink.
Mattel additionally has a historical past of perverting youngsters with merchandise like a child’s ebook that pushes gender transitioning on children aged 3-12, a transgender Barbie doll, a whole line of “gender-nonconforming” dolls, and a “Completely Stylin’ Tattoos Barbie” for little women.
The corporate reportedly launched the next assertion on November 10, advising dad and mom to “discard the product packaging or obscure the hyperlink and will contact Mattel customer support for additional data.”
“Mattel was made conscious of a misprint on the packaging of the Mattel Depraved assortment dolls, primarily bought within the US, which supposed to direct customers to the official WickedMovie.com touchdown web page.”
“We deeply remorse this unlucky error and are taking speedy motion to treatment this. Mother and father are suggested that the misprinted, incorrect web site shouldn’t be applicable for youngsters. Shoppers who have already got the product are suggested to discard the product packaging or obscure the hyperlink and will contact Mattel customer support for additional data.”
Nevertheless, for some dad and mom, it was too late, or they didn’t obtain the discover.
In keeping with the lawsuit, Plaintiff Holly Ricketson bought the doll on November 11, and Mattel “didn’t supply any refund for customers who had already bought the dolls.”
Ricketson filed the lawsuit Tuesday in a Los Angeles Federal District Courtroom, accusing Mattel of unjust enrichment, negligence, and violations of California’s shopper safety legal guidelines.
“After opening the field that contained the Depraved Doll, Plaintiff’s minor daughter used an iPhone to go to the web site proven on Defendant’s packaging,” the criticism states. “To her absolute shock the web site, ‘Depraved.com’, had nothing to do with the Depraved Doll. Somewhat, Depraved.com pasted scenes of pornographic commercials throughout her telephone display screen.”
The lawsuit seeks greater than $5 million plus curiosity in damages and lawyer charges for the category members.
Learn the total criticism under:
