The AI doll box trend in the context of intellectual property law: A case study of AI-generated images based on the identity of Barbie (AI Barbie)

Authors

  • Onnicha Sawaddichai School of Law, Bangkok University
  • Aunya Singsangob School of Law, Bangkok University
  • Parada Kaewparadai School of Law, Bangkok University

Keywords:

Generative AI, copyright, trademark, trade dress

Abstract

This article examines the AI doll box trend, particularly the creation of AI-generated Barbie images as a viral social media phenomenon that raises important issues in intellectual property law. It analyzes the legal risks associated with using generative AI to produce works based on the Barbie identity, which is protected by copyright, trademark, and trade dress law. Using a comparative legal approach, the article reviews statutory provisions, judicial decisions, and regulatory practices in the United States and the European Union to assess the adequacy and limitations of Thailand’s legal framework under the Copyright Act and the Trademark Act. The analysis shows that Thai law currently lacks clear standards for addressing AI-generated works, especially regarding the use of copyrighted materials for model training and the legal evaluation of AI-generated outputs. The article therefore proposes policy recommendations and practical guidelines to reduce legal uncertainty and to promote a balanced approach among intellectual property protection, freedom of expression, and technological innovation.

References

ชมพูนุท สถิตย์เสมากุล. (2566). การคุ้มครองเครื่องหมายรูปลักษณ์โดยรวมบนเว็บไซต์. วารสารนิติศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยรามคำแหง, 12(1), 3.

เทิดภพ ปิยวนะ. (2567). ปัญหาการคุ้มครองเครื่องหมายที่มีชื่อเสียงแพร่หลายทั่วไป: ศึกษากรณีระบบจดทะเบียนเครื่องหมายเชิงป้องกัน. ดุลพาห, 61(2), 66–92.

พิศวาท สุคนธพันธุ์. (2563). การล้อเลียนงานอันมีลิขสิทธิ์กับกฎหมายลิขสิทธิ์ไทย: กรณีศึกษาปัญหาการตีความว่าด้วยการใช้งานที่เป็นธรรม. วารสารรามคำแหง ฉบับนิติศาสตร์, 9(2), 2–33. https://so05.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/lawjournal/issue/view/16849

สมชาย รัตนซื่อสกุล. (2567). ข้อจำกัดการคุ้มครองลิขสิทธิ์สำหรับงานที่สร้างโดยปัญญาประดิษฐ์: ความท้าทายและผลกระทบทางกฎหมาย. วารสารรามคำแหง ฉบับนิติศาสตร์, 13(2), 1–40. https://so05.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/lawjournal/issue/view/17923

Admin. (2001). Mattel repudiated: Decisive victory for free speech in case involving artist’s use of Barbie doll. ACLU of Southern California. https://www.aclusocal.org/news/mattel-repudiated-decisive-victory-free-speech-case-involving-artists-use-barbie-doll/

Geronimi, Z. (2025, April 29). From parody to digital art: Rethinking the boundaries of fair use. Black Pre-Law Society. https://blackprelaw.studentgroups.columbia.edu/news/parody-digital-art-rethinking-boundaries-fair-use

Gowling WLG. (2024). The AI Act and IP. LoupedIn. https://loupedin.blog/2024/03/the-ai-act-and-ip/

Houvener, J. D. (2025,3). Barbie podcast trademark trouble unpacked [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kJ0csQdCC8

Jindal, R. (2023). Barbie and intellectual property: A closer look at the iconic doll’s protection. https://ijrti.org/papers/IJRTI2308040.pdf

Kaushal, T. (2023). Pink letter law: How Barbie has helped to shape IP law in the courts. IPWatchdog. https://ipwatchdog.com/2023/08/09/pink-letter-law-courtroom-barbie-helped-shape-ip-law/

LegalForce RAPC Worldwide P.C. (2025). How Mattel protects the Barbie brand rights. Trademarkia. https://www.trademarkia.com/news/entertainment/how-mattel-protects-barbie-brand-rights

Liv. (2025). ChatGPT AI action dolls: Concerns around the Barbie-like viral social trend. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5yg690e9eno

McIntosh, D. M., Penti, R. S., Schaal, Y., & Greason, M. (2025). A tale of three cases: How fair use is playing out in AI copyright lawsuits. Ropes & Gray.

PR Legal. (2025). Artificial intelligence and intellectual property law: What brings the AI Barbie trend? https://www.prlegal.rs/artificial-intelligence-and-intellectual-property-law-what-brings-the-ai-barbie-trend/

Salgado, I. (2025). Trademark parody: Should owners of famous marks just find it amusing? https://asipi.org/biblioteca/wp-content/uploads/sites/14/download-manager-files/Masters-Ensayo-2024-Igor-Salgado.pdf

Vaishnavi. (2025). AI Barbie legal risks: Copyright, deepfakes & trademark challenges explained (2025). Web Asha Technologies. https://www.webasha.com/blog/ai-barbie-legal-risks-copyright-deepfakes-trademark-challenges-explained

West, B. J., & Lanquist, E. D. (2025). Post-SCOTUS district court ruling in Jack Daniel’s v. VIP Products reshapes trademark dilution jurisprudence. Baker Donelson. https://www.bakerdonelson.com/post-scotus-district-court-ruling-in-jack-daniels-v-vip-products-reshapes-trademark-dilution-jurisprudence

WIPO. (2023). Barbie is everywhere – Here’s how it happened. https://www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/stories/barbie-2023.html

Downloads

Published

2026-06-23

How to Cite

Sawaddichai, O., Singsangob, A., & Kaewparadai, P. (2026). The AI doll box trend in the context of intellectual property law: A case study of AI-generated images based on the identity of Barbie (AI Barbie). Jornal of Social Sciences and Humanities Association of Private Higher Education Institutions of Thailand, 32(1), 98–113. retrieved from https://so06.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/apheit-ss/article/view/291769

Issue

Section

Academic Article