Thomas Forsythe created a series of photographs titled Food Chain Barbie, depicting household appliances attacking the dolls (who occasionally appear to enjoy the aggressions). Forsythe described his message as a critique of the “objectification of women associated with [Barbie].” In total, Forsythe made less than four thousand dollars from sales of Food Chain Barbie prints. Mattel, Inc. ("Mattel"), producers of the Barbie doll, brought a copyright infringement suit against Forsythe in the Central District of California. Forsythe successfully moved for summary judgement on grounds of fair use, and Mattel appealed. The Ninth Circuit affirmed. The Ninth Circuit analyzed the four factors of fair use: purpose, nature, amount, and market effect. First, the appellate court explained that the Food Chain Barbie series parodied Barbie. Second, although Barbie may be considered a creative work, most parodies comment on creative works, making this factor less relevant. Third, Forsythe copied no more than what was necessary for his artistic project to conjure up the original doll for the viewers. In particular, he did not physically replicate a doll, but rather included actual Barbie dolls in larger compositions. Finally, the appellate court concluded the photographs could not affect the market demand for Barbie dolls. Therefore, on balance, the appellate court held that Forsythe’s use of the Barbie dolls was protected under fair use.