G5!

[Khoufu]

As someone else said, the copyrights ended on some, and another company started making a small few (2-4?) ponies that fit descriptions of Surprise and other(s) so Hasbro can't get those SPECIFIC copyrights back. The rest are their own choice to change.

[Wardah]

It wasn't the copyrights but trademarks. Having a trademark just means nobody else can use it. If Hasbro doesn't have the trademark for "Moondancer" for example, Mattel could come along and make their own entirely different character and name it "Moondancer". And Hasbro couldn't do anything about it.

[Stellaluna]

It wasn't the copyrights but trademarks. Having a trademark just means nobody else can use it. If Hasbro doesn't have the trademark for "Moondancer" for example, Mattel could come along and make their own entirely different character and name it "Moondancer". And Hasbro couldn't do anything about it.

Interesting, but what about names that are so generic there's no way just one company could claim it. For example, Bubbles, Ivy, Cupcake. I would think trademark rules would be different for these. It has to be that multiple entities can own it at once.

[Carrehz]

If they "lost the rights to everyone but Applejack and Spike", how come the Dollymix ponies exist? What about the Running Press ponies? Not to mention all the retro merch..

It wasn't the copyrights but trademarks. Having a trademark just means nobody else can use it. If Hasbro doesn't have the trademark for "Moondancer" for example, Mattel could come along and make their own entirely different character and name it "Moondancer". And Hasbro couldn't do anything about it.

Interesting, but what about names that are so generic there's no way just one company could claim it. For example, Bubbles, Ivy, Cupcake. I would think trademark rules would be different for these. It has to be that multiple entities can own it at once.

Not sure about the reply to this, but I do remember hearing that this is why they mostly stopped using one-word names starting with G3 - it's easier to trademark "Scootaloo" than "Firefly".

[Wardah]

It wasn't the copyrights but trademarks. Having a trademark just means nobody else can use it. If Hasbro doesn't have the trademark for "Moondancer" for example, Mattel could come along and make their own entirely different character and name it "Moondancer". And Hasbro couldn't do anything about it.

Interesting, but what about names that are so generic there's no way just one company could claim it. For example, Bubbles, Ivy, Cupcake. I would think trademark rules would be different for these. It has to be that multiple entities can own it at once.

In the 80s I'm guessing it was a bit different. It was more about selling toys than building a brand that could be licensed out. Not that they didn't license things out back then but it's become much more important.

[Sunset]

Yeah, the whole trademark thing was just an excuse.  Why?  Because Hasbro trademarks new characters all the time.  It's not harder to trademark something old than something new.  And if it is a common word problem then they could have done what they did for Rarity and Spike who are trademarked as "Rarity the Unicorn" and "Spike the Dragon" respectively.

They simply didn't want to use the old characters.  Or more accurately, they wanted to use the G3 characters that they had already been using to build brand recognition, most specifically Pinkie Pie and Rainbow Dash.

[Taffeta]

When G3 was out, we used to watch the trademarks to see what names were getting listed. I remember that.

I think also there may be global and national trademarking that goes on. I'm sure that some of the different names in different places were partly that and partly cultural.

The fact that they got Storm trademarked (even if they ultimately changed it to Thundercloud) in the UK kind of suggests the categories and regions were different, otherwise the clash with XMen would be really bad...unless of course Hasbro had some kind of relationship with Mattel then. Maybe Storm (and Frosty for Ice Crystal) were just too risky to push forward.

I think there's a case that they wanted to continue existing trademarks for Rarity, Dash and Pinkie rather than start new ones, probably that costs more. Why use really old names when you can just renew existing ones and save the hassle? Fluttershy is also a G3 name.

Cherry Berry, on the other hand, is a UK G1 name, but was never trademarked in the US. Except they did try to use it but ultimately didn't. That one always gets me. I'm always curious to know why.

There's also a difference between a trademarked name and a trademarked image. They probably have still the rights to the images of the ponies they're using on stuff. Very little actually features pony names, though. And these are not in the toy category, but the clothing category, which also helps.

As for the Dolly Mix and such, I don't know. But the G1 Dollymix were not global. Chances are they were licenced in the UK for the UK which isn't necessarily the same as holding the big overall rights to these names.

The retro ponies' boxes don't have TM after the name of the pony. It does say that these are all TMs of Hasbro, but doesn't specifically designate the pony's name. I imagine that because this is a retro rerelease under licence of something that existed in the past, it gets to fly under the radar.

[cookifaa]

I wouldn't mind Applejack and Pinkie sticking around, since they're from before G4 anyway. Minty should be a main character, I'm sure people would love that.

Also, Applejack as a boy but still with normal length pony hair, yes please!

Why gender bend a known character, when they can just make new ones or bring back old ones?

I am 90% sure Hasbro UK switched AJ's gender around in some of the books before settling on her being a girl in the comics and onwards. I think similar happened with one of the seated ponies. Possibly Bubbles. I would need to check and my books are buried in my wardrobe. But while I am not particularly of the persuasion that AJ should be a boy, it's not that there's not a precedent.

I want Pinkie Pie to be permanently erased from existence, but Hasbro like her way too much for that to happen. I didn't like her much in G3, but the character in G4 is just not funny and very annoying. And the name is also an irritation. I really dislike her a lot...of all the mane 6, I'd like to see her go. And if Rainbow Dash were to stay, a brand new personality that isn't the current one would help. Though I'd like it if they used a different rainbow palette. We've seen blue/rainbow for 2 generations now. What about yellow/rainbow or pink/rainbow or green/rainbow? Or even purple/rainbow or orange/rainbow and bring in Tickle/Flutterbye type palettes? They could merge Flutterbye with Fluttershy and create a yellow rainbow pegasus with a butterfly symbol. That would be interesting. Even if the name Fluttershy stayed, the pony would be original and thus more interesting.

Shifting species between ponies is not interesting and demonstrates Hasbro's lack of creative imagination now vs in previous generational reboots. They are clinging onto G4 like a puppy afraid to leave its mother, but that's how you kill a toy line. G5 needs to be brave enough to redesign the colour palettes and rename the core characters. Otherwise you just regurgitate stale stuff and end up with the mess we saw with Monster High's reboot. Where the characters got a minor makeover, the story changed (for the worst) and suddenly the line fizzled into terminal failure.

Better to end MLP forever than repeat G4 over and over for the rest of existance just because nobody at Hasbro has the ability to create a new core any more. (If we even need a core, which in my opinion, also demonstrates a lack of creativity).

As LBS said, whatever sells is the ultimate goal. But it would be nice to think someone involved in it cared. I think G4 was originally created by someone who cared, but the toy production element hasn't really been. If you look at the initiatives with previous generations - range, colour schemes, accessories, package stories or at least information - it's been gradually depleting since the end of G3. G1 ponies had individual stories for most of the run, different card art for each set, and there was a sense that they were being designed with a child's imagination in mind.

G4 toys are sold to perpetuate the 'magic of friendship' from the tv show, but that's about all.

I don't hate G4 and I have several of the toys, even though I dislike the show. But if I was a kid now, I would not have collected MLP. The toys I rejected most as a kid were ones that lacked variety. The Mane 6 would've put me off.

I've said it before, but it's the mane 6 who shelf-sit in my area.

I always presumed that Applejack and Bubbles were boys, I never realised they weren't! The way they were portrayed in the books and in Rescue from Midnight Castle just made me think that they were boys. I also thought that Firefly, Gusty, Suprise and Paradise were boys for long enough. Its only going back and re-watching all my old VHS tapes that I realised that they may actually be girls, haha!

[Taffeta]

I can totally understand that assumption growing up in the UK...although not the others you list, just AJ and Bubbles. It may be the Stolen Shadow or maybe the Man in the Moon book. One of those has a lot of things that get corrected in a reprint, such as Sea Pony names, but I forget if the gender thing is that.

I have a feeling somewhere Moondancer is also depicted as male but that may be a US thing? Or maybe I imagined it...I know there's the ceramic.

I wish I could get to my books right now to check, it's bugging me which one it is Most of my books are either in the attic or under a ton of stuff in my wardrobe but if anyone has one of the aforementioned titles to hand, if they fancy checking, I'd be so happy

[cookifaa]

I can totally understand that assumption growing up in the UK...although not the others you list, just AJ and Bubbles. It may be the Stolen Shadow or maybe the Man in the Moon book. One of those has a lot of things that get corrected in a reprint, such as Sea Pony names, but I forget if the gender thing is that.

I have a feeling somewhere Moondancer is also depicted as male but that may be a US thing? Or maybe I imagined it...I know there's the ceramic.

I wish I could get to my books right now to check, it's bugging me which one it is Most of my books are either in the attic or under a ton of stuff in my wardrobe but if anyone has one of the aforementioned titles to hand, if they fancy checking, I'd be so happy

I actually have both of them books, I'll go check right now!

Post Merge: April 12, 2018, 04:03:05 PM

I cant find my man in the moon book    I have a feeling it got put into the loft when most of my books went up there. I did separate it but knowing my dad he probably just grabbed whatever books he saw.

I did check the stolen shadow book though, and it refers Moondancer as a she once, thats it.

Although it refers to the seaponies as both seaponies and seahorses? Maybe a reprinting mistake.