@joand  
It’s stated clearly in the very first point:
 

 
Whether or not they stop using the trademark themselves is irrelevant to that point.

@cheezedoodle  
Did you even read it? Right away it says you have to stop using it for the property to be considered abandoned. They haven’t stopped using My Little Pony or it’s characters. They won’t until the show ends. If they were just liberal about letting others use them, it would be no skin off their nose all the same.
 
If you own something, there’s nothing that says you can’t let other people use it in ways you’re okay with. If you’re living in a house and you let someone else crash there, it’s still your house. It’s only if you leave for a long time that they get squatters rights if they stayed and you didn’t.
 
Not every company sends out C and D’s to popular projects using their IPs. Not every company even has the cash or manpower for that. It would be ridiculous if they lost their shit because someone else started using it and they had to let them get away with it. That isn’t how it works.

OFF SEASON APRIL FOOLS!

@09MurphyM  
My fic’s sequel (no words as of yet) features Cotton Cloudy as a main character.

You could say the same for Cotton Cloudy, that white pegasus filly flying with Fluttershy. She is also a Background pony.

@joand
 
Educate thyself

@KrishnaKarnak  

 
>responsibility
 
That’s a funny way of spelling “misguided sense of economic incentive”.
 
Yeah, no, they don’t have “responsibility” to do shit, they’re not going to get in trouble with anyone else if they let BMA stay on YouTube, just like they had no responsibility to C and D Fighting is Magic or any of the other various fandom projects they have shot dead.
 
Who cares if Jan’s style is similar to theirs? I mean, I do, because it’s awesome. Why would that be a reason why Hasbro would decide to shut it down? That’s like if someone sued Zone just cause their animation is show quality.

Because he want to be closer with Sweetie Belle.

I doubt it’s foreshadowing anything. Twist is there, too, and she hasn’t done anything since the CMC’s first adventure way back in season 1.
 
Also, Jan Animations used Sweetie Belle in a number of their cartoons. Sweetie Belle is not only under copyright, but her name is trademarked, and having a trademark comes with a requirement to enforce ownership of it or you lose the legal protection of having it.

@lunafan22  

@lunafan22  
I really liked her design.  
But seriously, how does she put up with him everyday..?

@lunafan22  
i think most people did once the word got out about her.

@PurplePresident  

 
 
I only watched that shit for his mom

@joand  
Doesn’t matter if they don’t do anything with the character. The idea is complete ludicrous. I can’t fathom the idea of this even being possible but it’s like the Calvin peeing indent. Except not as bad. Hasbro gets sued for the dumbest reasons anyways.

Well, Button Mash was annoying, anyway.  
His fanon personality. Jeez, kid, shut up with your whining.
 
(I can’t wait to be flamed!)

@Background Pony #850B  
no

@Revenant Wings  
As someone who really likes Creative Commons you don’t seem to know what it is. Creative Commons is not a law, it is basically a contract that you can put your own copyrighted material under. Since Hasbro designed the character known as Button Mash originally he would not in anyway shape or form fall under CC regardless of what Jan did with him.
 
It does not supercede US copyright laws in anyway, all it really does is tell people that you can use this material without fear of a copyright claim as long as you follow the rules in the Creative Commons contract.

@joand
 
Oh look, BMA drama! Hasbro has a responsibility to defend their IP, and Jan’s style was significantly close enough to blur the line between the two parties.

@downloadsbacon  
Ownership is a retarded concept anyways, especially when you’re talking about ideas and not physical objects. When it’s such an insignificant idea as a freaking background character, of which they have hundreds they are doing nothing with, it’s ridiculous.
 
BMA is not a replacement for pony, it is not taking business away from pony, it is not defaming the name of pony or Hasbro or DHX or Lauren Faust. It did nothing wrong, and yet Hasbro’s blood lust could not be sated until BMA was dead. That’s the long and short of it.

Anyone who wants a more clear reason as to why think the button situation is how it is, look into the archie vs Ken Penders lawsuit.
 
Everything that happened there is what a lot of people think happened here, which is just ludicrous as Jan never even designed him let alone worked for Hasbro! Hasbro would be in there full legal rights to send a C&D if he was profiting off of there intellectual property.

@Revenant Wings
 
That doesn’t mean Button Mash is any less Hasbro’s, though. Jan isn’t allowed to make anything Button Mash anymore, so how does he own it?

@KrishnaKarnak  
Nope. Hasbro has that published and under stricter laws.

That’s not how copyright works. Hasbro still owns the character, which is why they sent a cease and desist to Jan. He was using their character without their permission, and he hasn’t been able to make any more videos with the character since then.
 
I’m guessing the color change is just to distance the character a little from the fanon stuff.

@downloadsbacon  
Why don’t you ask a lawyer? Yes, which is how The Simpsons owns the name Appleseed.

also