Context? You don’t need context. Coco Pommel. That’s all.

Coco written off, no. In Honest Apple, maybe, but she really didn’t need to appear, and that episode sucked anyway except for Inky Rose, Lily Lace, Glitter Spritz and Strawberry Sunrise
 
Babs, on the other hand…

@OneAmongOthers  
That I agree with, they maybe could have come up with something better than “Miss Pommel.”
 
But I think it’s a well-meaning nod to the fans. “Miss” isn’t really a name, and Rarity has been referred to as “Miss Rarity” on several occasions. And “Mrs.” Cup Cake an “Mr.” Carrot Cake. Not to mention Spike “Mister The Dragon” the dragon, hero of the Crystal Empire. And it was a choice that preserved her last name. So that leaves it wide-open to interpretation that “Miss Pommel” is only a trade name for her fashion career. And that her “real” name is still Coco Pommel. (Which could also be a stealthy middle finger to Chanel International BV, since Coco Chanel’s real name was not Coco.)

@OneAmongOthers
 
I get the feeling that there were moments in season 3 where Derpy was meant to appear (maybe even have small scenes like season 2) and they were edited out before the episodes aired. She can be seen in some crowd scenes from behind for example but in other shots of the same scene, she isn’t there.
 
Now with Derpy, I wouldn’t have minded if she was referred to as “Miss Hooves”. It would be much better then “Muffins” anyway.

@Ferrotter  
Well they kinda did write off Derpy for quite awhile. Sure she came back later (under a different name and her eyes not as crooked), but it was years until they did.

@Background Pony #D6FE  
That at least is a good point, though really Coco has never been Rarity’s assistant. She was going to be, once, but was sick at Rarity For You’s grand opening. The three personal shopper ponies got the job(s) instead from Rainbow Dash, and proved very capable, and Rarity wouldn’t just boot them to the curb after they did so well. Coco at the time was regularly employed as a costume designer for the theater (thanks to Rarity) so I doubt she minded not getting a simple sales gig anyway. There’s a good chance she just said yes to help out her friend Rarity for the grand opening, and was hoping for it to be only temporary, just until Rarity could find someone trustworthy to replace her, so she could go back to design full-time.
 
At this point, it was also outright stated in Honest Apple that she’s now a Manehattan fashion designer in her own right, not even limited to theatrical costumes. If she ever was Rarity’s assistant, she’s definitely not Rarity’s assistant now. She’s likely Rarity’s (presumably honest and definitely friendly) competitor in the Canterlot show, somepony who would be in much the same situation as Rarity, needing her own assistants. I agree it would have been nice to see her at the competition getting her own wares ready for the runway, but it was a busy episode so no surprise at all they didn’t show it. Even if it had been scripted and storyboarded (which wouldn’t surprise me at all) or even animated, that would have been something easy to cut for time without hurting the storyline. I’m much more bothered and worried they didn’t show Molly, Azure Velour, and Flashdancer entertaining customers in the store, or being groupies of DJ PON-3 to show why they weren’t in the store.

@Ferrotter  
Also I didn’t know Coco was in the movie. I never watched it myself. But I guess you are right. She at least had some screen time. Still… Miss Pommel sounds silly. They could have came up with something much better. A name instead of just calling her miss. All characters in the show are almost always called by their first name. So hearing Miss being used is kinda stupid.

@Background Pony #D6FE  
Wait so Coco wasn’t there? Or was she there?

@Ferrotter
 
It’s a bad sign though when Rarity claims that she needs all her assistants and then she doesn’t appear in the group at all (not even as a simple non speaking cameo).
 
It’s like she was intended to be there but at the last minute they edited her out and replaced her with a generic pony.

They totally effing hate her and would never use the Miss Pommel name:
 
Never.
 
Never in a million effing years.
 
And they never ever ever ever ever put her in the movie.  

 
Yup, Hasbro totally wanted to kill her off rather than use the Miss Pommel name. That’s why they came up with that name and spent the money and lawyer salaries to trademark it. And why they totally never used it for merchandise. And why they didn’t even make DHX have Rarity use that name for her in the show. Why they didn’t put her in the movie. Why she’s not on the cover of The Ultimate Guide. Yup, that’s how a sensible, money-oriented company kills off a character. I’ll also bookmark this so I can point to it when she appears in the show again.

@OneAmongOthers  
Yup, just like they wrote off Derpy.

@Ferrotter  
They wrote her off. Plain and simple. It was easier. You will never see her again on the show. Miss Pommel is a stupid name for such a young character. And it sounds even stupider saying it. Which is why she isn’t on the show anymore.

@OneAmongOthers  
You were ignorant of Coco Chanel’s history != no one knew her past history. Lots of people know she was a Nazi, and many care. I didn’t think it reflected on our Coco Pommel, and understood that it was a reference to Coco Chanel’s role in the fashion industry not her role in spying for the Nazis and using her social contacts in British upper society to try to obtain a favorable war outcome for the Third Reich, but I was certainly aware she was a Nazi. Now, you’re right that Coco Chanel definitely wouldn’t have taken it that far, because she’s been dead and buried for decades. And it’s not precisely because her estate and corporation did care that Hasbro backed down. Rather, it’s because they didn’t have to care, they just had to know one thing that any law student knows.
 
Hasbro would probably have won if Chanel International BV pushed it and Hasbro fought back in court; our Coco is a fair use parody, doesn’t compete with Chanel, and in no way reflects badly on Coco Chanel. (If anything, quite the opposite.) But once she became popular and the show started using her as a recurring character, it’s not actually guaranteed that she’d be seen as a fair use parody; a single use pretty much always qualifies as fair use, recurring uses much less so. Which means defending it, even if they win, even if they were guaranteed to win, would require Hasbro to defend against it in court which could get expensive. Chanel’s lawyers know they could ask for a settlement as long as they stay below Hasbro’s estimated cost of defending against it, and they would be stupid not to ask, and Hasbro would be stupid to say no to a reasonable settlement. So even avoiding a lawsuit would cost them, if a little less than winning it. Which is hardly worth it to them for a background character they couldn’t even trademark anyway because her name is a fair use parody. Changing her name isn’t win-win for them, it’s win-win-win. They get a trademarked name, Miss Pommel, for a moderately popular character; don’t have to worry about the cost of fighting off, or even paying off, Chanel International BV’s lawyers; and no longer have a character named after a notably antisemitic Nazi.

@Ferrotter  
All of that is irrelevant. No one knew her past history and none of that even mattered. They could have shrugged it off and defended it. I doubt Coco Chanel would have even taken it that far anyway. But in the end its a name for a plastic horse toy very few cared about and one that got even less screen time. So in their eyes it was a minuet change they could deal with. Wash their hands and be done with it.

She will always be Coco Pommel to me even if they can’t call her that in the show any more. But she was originally named after a French Nazi who just happened to have managed her public reputation better than she deserved, and it’s not all bad that she isn’t named after a Nazi any more. I can’t get too upset. It’s not like Derpy Hooves, Heartstrings, or Lulamoon.

@Jarkes  
It was frivolous nonsense and would have been probably slapped down in any court. Hasbro just didn’t want to spend money because heaven forbid they actually stand up and protect the characters we love. Though if its a fan they will come down harshly. Typical corporate bullshit. Slam anyone weak enough to be easily squashed, but when it is someone who has the means to possibly stand toe to toe with you? Nah… Quickly turn tail and make changes. Can’t spend that money yo. And in the end its just over some character most will just forget, so to them its a minuet loss.

@Background Pony #D6FE  
Be mad as Hasbro. Coco Chanel hadn’t even filed a copyright claim. Only some minor litigation. Hasbro quickly jumped the gun and changed it before anything really happened.

@Background Pony #D6FE  
She’s dead like a long time ago. So I dunno weather it’s accurate now to go ahead and say the name.

@Background Pony #D6FE
 
They never even filed a lawsuit though. Hasbro just made the change preemptively because they thought they might. Which to be fair isn’t an unfounded assumption since Chanel’s estate is infamously litigious…

Oh, so the freaking Gameloft game can use her name, but the show and merchandise can’t. Go figure.

@OneAmongOthers
 
Don’t be mad at Hasbro, be mad at the copyright holders of Coco Chanel.

@Background Pony #3C29  
Only to the scum as Hasbro. To the rest of us she’s Coco and always will be Coco.

Wow!