Derpygate

[cuteycindyhoney 13,282]

But the thing is, it would have still cost them money and maybe they are so fed up with us that they do not feel like spending another dime, just ax her out from the future.

 

If Hasbro wanted to remove Derpy for fear of reaction, it would cost far less then any feared lawsuits. Actually speaking, I don't see how it would cost anything at all to do a quick eye correct and color change. Like I said, the work would actually only take a few minutes. Look at the fan made "Epic Pie Time" (animated in Flash) The Zap Apple episode aired the day before they were going to present their anime at a convention. They had time to recolor some of the apples to rainbow hues with no trouble at all.

Edited March 5, 2012 by cuteycindyhoney

[hwrogers 168]

if i was an animator i'd charge double at least for having to correct someone else's mistake, it's what i did as a mechanic, if it is able to run as-is then it will ALWAYS cost less to not fix what isn't broken.

[Tiina Brown 67]

I think we have to start asking ourselves something more important here:

 

How derped, clumsy, or even somewhat mentally disabled do WE, as a community, want Derpy to be?

Ok, there may be may opinions on the the details, but can we find common ground about the broader picture?

 

Derpy was developed thanks to a "derp": The eyes.

She also got her Roundup voice from a Derp: Someone didn't tell the voiceactor that Derpy is a mare.

 

So, how Derp is Derpy supposed to be?

BaldDumboRat on youtube made a comment to the oddity of the voice as Derpy, explaining really well how Derpy's voice may get boyish at times.

 

The Censored version's voice is too girly-girly for derpy, i think, but otherwise i don't' mind if Derpy's voice gets less boyish ...

But i'd rather hear that she keeps the "Original Roundup voice", or if they use BaldDumboRat's explanation.

But what do all else think?

[Burning Desire 11]

I think people are over-reacting by thinking this is the end of the fandom. However, I'm adamantly against censorship, and I think anger over this is justified (though I disagree with people attacking others online over this. Civil discourse can communicate this point much better than name-calling and trolling).

[cuteycindyhoney 13,282]

if i was an animator i'd charge double at least for having to correct someone else's mistake, it's what i did as a mechanic, if it is able to run as-is then it will ALWAYS cost less to not fix what isn't broken.

 

As an animator you'd do what the people you contracted with tell you to do, or you suddenly find that your work is heading to another studio. Go look it up. Using flash, changing Derpy's colors and fixing her eyes would take only a few minutes per episode. She'd then just be some generic pony. If Hasbro intended to get rid of Derpy because of the complaints, why would they say "Oh, let's just wait until next season" when all her appearances could be removed from every remaining second season episode in about an hour? That would not be good business sense. Face it, in a lot of cases all they'd have to do is matte another section of sky or ground over her, and she'd be gone without a trace. Hasbro actually did what they could to please both factions. They could have just recolored her and called her Ditzy-Doo in "Last Round-up" since they already changed the audio.

[DrOphthalmos 497]

WOOT! I got my "The Friendship Express" DVD. I know it was already said that Derpy would not be changed (only iTunes) but I still held my breath until Rainbow Dash finally said, "Now careful DERPY!" I am overjoyed that it was too expensive for them to recall the DVDs.

[hwrogers 168]

As an animator you'd do what the people you contracted with tell you to do, or you suddenly find that your work is heading to another studio. Go look it up. Using flash, changing Derpy's colors and fixing her eyes would take only a few minutes per episode. She'd then just be some generic pony. If Hasbro intended to get rid of Derpy because of the complaints, why would they say "Oh, let's just wait until next season" when all her appearances could be removed from every remaining second season episode in about an hour? That would not be good business sense. Face it, in a lot of cases all they'd have to do is matte another section of sky or ground over her, and she'd be gone without a trace. Hasbro actually did what they could to please both factions. They could have just recolored her and called her Ditzy-Doo in "Last Round-up" since they already changed the audio.

 

wrong, at least on the pay, as the original work was not defective or poorly animated, if it were a mistake on the animators part then i would see them not getting paid to fix what they should have gotten right the first time, this is however not the case. the case here is that an existing work would have to be re-edited/animated to some extent, that would take time (regardless how little) which would require payment for services rendered, if they refused to pay they would not have any studio that would take their work. end result is redoing any of it WILL cost money at some point, noone i've ever known works for free, and animators have homes and bills which require them to get paid in order to live just like the rest of us.

Edited March 6, 2012 by Picyker

[cuteycindyhoney 13,282]

wrong, at least on the pay, as the original work was not defective or poorly animated, if it were a mistake on the animators part then i would see them not getting paid to fix what they should have gotten right the first time, this is however not the case. the case here is that an existing work would have to be re-edited/animated to some extent, that would take time (regardless how little) which would require payment for services rendered, if they refused to pay they would not have any studio that would take their work. end result is redoing any of it WILL cost money at some point, noone i've ever known works for free, and animators have homes and bills which require them to get paid in order to live just like the rest of us.

 

Your outlook is a bit on the naive side. Animators work under a contract per project. They don't work piecemeal episode by episode. Do you think they get paid a dollar amount for each frame produced? It doesn't work that way. Animators working on, say, episode eight of season three could easily be diverted for one afternoon to alter/remove Derpy from the rest of season two. They wouldn't even need to pull any overtime. There are no cells to repaint, remember. The work is all stored on Studio B's computers. Their contract is for working on MLP:FIM as a whole. There would be no conflict at all. If Hasbro was really worried about threats of product boycotts and or lawsuits, which do you think would be cheaper for them. Pay for about an hour's work on a computer, or roll up their sleeves and get to litigating while their sales drop? Since Derpy appeared in a post "Voice" episode, logically the factions that were against her were appeased by the voice change and dropping of the name. She may never be called by name again, and the second voice is probably what we'll here if she gets any more lines, but Derpy is still with us. It literally would make no sense to leave her in on the unaired episodes, but leave her out of season three.

[SBaby 660]

Since Derpy appeared in a post "Voice" episode, logically the factions that were against her were appeased by the voice change and dropping of the name. She may never be called by name again, and the second voice is probably what we'll here if she gets any more lines, but Derpy is still with us. It literally would make no sense to leave her in on the unaired episodes, but leave her out of season three.

 

Unless she wasn't going to be in Season 3 to begin with. But I don't see that happening.

[hwrogers 168]

Your outlook is a bit on the naive side. Animators work under a contract per project. They don't work piecemeal episode by episode. Do you think they get paid a dollar amount for each frame produced? It doesn't work that way. Animators working on, say, episode eight of season three could easily be diverted for one afternoon to alter/remove Derpy from the rest of season two. They wouldn't even need to pull any overtime. There are no cells to repaint, remember. The work is all stored on Studio B's computers. Their contract is for working on MLP:FIM as a whole. There would be no conflict at all. If Hasbro was really worried about threats of product boycotts and or lawsuits, which do you think would be cheaper for them. Pay for about an hour's work on a computer, or roll up their sleeves and get to litigating while their sales drop? Since Derpy appeared in a post "Voice" episode, logically the factions that were against her were appeased by the voice change and dropping of the name. She may never be called by name again, and the second voice is probably what we'll here if she gets any more lines, but Derpy is still with us. It literally would make no sense to leave her in on the unaired episodes, but leave her out of season three.

 

as a mechanic if i was pulled from one job to redo another for unfounded customer complaint (initial episodes were prouced as was desired by hasbro) then i would fully expect to be paid for whatever little time was spent on the newly requested job. one hour or 1 minute i'd expect to get paid. if i weren't paid then i'd let every mechanic in town know that customer "X" refuses to pay and thus "X" would find that NO ONE would do their work as they have failed to pay, or demand payment up front. don't think me naive, people work for MONEY, and if a job is extended by an alteration to plans then pay must also be equally altered. it would not be a zero cost.

 

if you are correct then i have a hard time finding any logical reason for anyone to work that field until major revisions are made to how people are paid. what you are talking about is free labor, and while that may on occasion work with family (and even then not often, least not with mine) you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who'd work for a company and provide free service of even a few minutes, time on the clock = money in pocket = food on table.

[cuteycindyhoney 13,282]

as a mechanic if i was pulled from one job to redo another for unfounded customer complaint (initial episodes were prouced as was desired by hasbro) then i would fully expect to be paid for whatever little time was spent on the newly requested job. one hour or 1 minute i'd expect to get paid. if i weren't paid then i'd let every mechanic in town know that customer "X" refuses to pay and thus "X" would find that NO ONE would do their work as they have failed to pay, or demand payment up front. don't think me naive, people work for MONEY, and if a job is extended by an alteration to plans then pay must also be equally altered. it would not be a zero cost.

 

if you are correct then i have a hard time finding any logical reason for anyone to work that field until major revisions are made to how people are paid. what you are talking about is free labor, and while that may on occasion work with family (and even then not often, least not with mine) you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who'd work for a company and provide free service of even a few minutes, time on the clock = money in pocket = food on table.

 

The whole problem with your argument is that you're not comparing apples to oranges, you're comparing apples to small jagged pieces of glass. From a legal point of view it DOES NOT WORK THE WAY YOU DESCRIBE. As a mechanic, are you paid a retainer and contracted to always work on just one car? No, you work on a multitude of different automobiles. If you signed a contract to work on one car, of course you would do what your boss, the car owner you signed the contract with, wanted you to do with it. The animators are being paid to work on the entire project of MLP:FIM. You can't compare that to fixing a car that somebody else screwed up. Hasbro is boss in this animation project "car". The entirety of MLP is that car. Hasbro said

"The way the car horn sounds is pissing people off. They're threatening to call the cops and charge me with disturbing the peace. You have to change it to one that sounds better right now. While you're at it, scrape off that bumper sticker. There's a word on it that some people say offended them."

Studio B said

"Yes boss, we'll get right on it."

 

 

There, I now made it into a workable analogy.

 

Unless she wasn't going to be in Season 3 to begin with. But I don't see that happening.

 

Time will tell. I stand by what I said. Besides, I'd wager several episodes of season three were already finished by the time the Derpy Debacle hit the internet. The same reasoning holds true. If they were going to change her out of those season three episodes, why would they leave her in the rest of season one? It makes no sense.

Edited March 6, 2012 by cuteycindyhoney

[hwrogers 168]

The whole problem with your argument is that you're not comparing apples to oranges, you're comparing apples to small jagged pieces of glass. From a legal point of view it DOES NOT WORK THE WAY YOU DESCRIBE. As a mechanic, are you paid a retainer and contracted to always work on just one car? No, you work on a multitude of different automobiles. If you signed a contract to work on one car, of course you would do what your boss, the car owner you signed the contract with, wanted you to do with it. The animators are being paid to work on the entire project of MLP:FIM. You can't compare that to fixing a car that somebody else screwed up. Hasbro is boss in this animation project "car". The entirety of MLP is that car. Hasbro said

"The way the car horn sounds is pissing people off. They're threatening to call the cops and charge me with disturbing the peace. You have to change it to one that sounds better right now. While you're at it, scrape off that bumper sticker. There's a word on it that some people say offended them."

Studio B said

"Yes boss, we'll get right on it."

 

 

There, I now made it into a workable analogy.

 

 

except that you haven't, as a mechanic i am contracted to do a job, then i am contracted to do a different job. making the show is a job, fixing already made episodes is a different job, if hasbro demanded shows be redone for free they'd never get another show made, you have to pay to get work done, pure and simple. also your analogy of apples to oranges =/= apples to small bits of glass is far off, perhaps you mean apples to apples =/= apples to oranges (oranges easily replaced by anything but apples) do not think me simple for expecting people to demand pay in return for work done. your argument is flawed in that you're expecting animators to take up a new task (redoing derpy) for no charge, there is a cost to do that, if there is no cost paid there will be no work done, that is a fact of life, and if you've been screwed in such a fashion as you describe an animator's pay rate to be then i have a lawn you can mow for $200, but you'll have to mow it 200 times because i said so.

[SBaby 660]

Your outlook is a bit on the naive side. Animators work under a contract per project. They don't work piecemeal episode by episode. Do you think they get paid a dollar amount for each frame produced? It doesn't work that way. Animators working on, say, episode eight of season three could easily be diverted for one afternoon to alter/remove Derpy from the rest of season two. They wouldn't even need to pull any overtime. There are no cells to repaint, remember. The work is all stored on Studio B's computers. Their contract is for working on MLP:FIM as a whole.

It doesn't quite work that way, though. While it is true that animation studios themselves do indeed get contracted to work on different projects (usually; there are some exceptions), it isn't like a construction company. They are able to negotiate the particulars of any given contract, what needs to be done, and how much they get for it (through collective bargaining). And moreover, animators get paid by the hour, not by the project. Taking Disney as an example, if you were an animator working for their animation company, you'd get paid anywhere from $25 to $39 an hour for your work on any given project (currently; the pay scale is going to be going up by about $1,500 pretty soon). During the production of SatAM (in 1991), the animators made between $20 and $30 an hour for their work. Putting it into perspective, it takes about two weeks (8 hours/day, five days a week) to animate an episode of a cartoon show, so if you went episode by episode, it cost said company between $1,600 and $2,400 per animator to get the episode animated (and that's not even getting into voice actors). This would of course all be negotiated in the contract itself.

 

If they needed to go back and change something, even a minor change, they would have to pay someone separately to do it (that work would be separate from the contract, since it wouldn't have originally been in there to begin with). Granted, yes, it is still cheaper for Hasbro to just change Derpy's eyes as you said (it's really like five minutes of work for anyone that knows Flash), but no animator would do it for free.

Edited March 6, 2012 by SBaby

[hwrogers 168]

It doesn't quite work that way, though. While it is true that animation studios themselves do indeed get contracted to work on different projects (usually; there are some exceptions), it isn't like a construction company. They are able to negotiate the particulars of any given contract, what needs to be done, and how much they get for it (through collective bargaining). And moreover, animators get paid by the hour, not by the project. Taking Disney as an example, if you were an animator working for their animation company, you'd get paid anywhere from $25 to $39 an hour for your work on any given project (currently; the pay scale is going to be going up by about $1,500 pretty soon). During the production of SatAM (in 1991), the animators made between $20 and $30 an hour for their work. Putting it into perspective, it takes about two weeks (8 hours/day, five days a week) to animate an episode of a cartoon show, so if you went episode by episode, it cost said company between $1,600 and $2,400 per animator to get the episode animated (and that's not even getting into voice actors). This would of course all be negotiated in the contract itself.

 

If they needed to go back and change something, even a minor change, they would have to pay someone separately to do it (that work would be separate from the contract, since it wouldn't have originally been in there to begin with). Granted, yes, it is still cheaper for Hasbro to just change Derpy's eyes as you said (it's really like five minutes of work for anyone that knows Flash), but no animator would do it for free.

 

thank you.

 

I smell troll...

Bye

 

lol, thats what i smelled somtime around here;

 

Your outlook is a bit on the naive side.

 

and i'm the troll?

[Drakkon 362]

making the show is a job, fixing already made episodes is a different job

 

I have been observing this for a bit, but honestly, this is where your argument falls apart. The show's makers are hired to work on the show, not to make episodes. They are being paid monthly for working on the show, regardless if it is patching it up, creating new episodes, going to Bronycon, or sitting back and getting laid at work. So long as you are in the studio and are—meant to be—doing something that you are told to do.

Edited March 6, 2012 by Inactive Sparkle

[cuteycindyhoney 13,282]

It doesn't quite work that way, though. While it is true that animation studios themselves do indeed get contracted to work on different projects (usually; there are some exceptions), it isn't like a construction company. They are able to negotiate the particulars of any given contract, what needs to be done, and how much they get for it (through collective bargaining). And moreover, animators get paid by the hour, not by the project. Taking Disney as an example, if you were an animator working for their animation company, you'd get paid anywhere from $25 to $39 an hour for your work on any given project (currently; the pay scale is going to be going up by about $1,500 pretty soon). During the production of SatAM (in 1991), the animators made between $20 and $30 an hour for their work. Putting it into perspective, it takes about two weeks (8 hours/day, five days a week) to animate an episode of a cartoon show, so if you went episode by episode, it cost said company between $1,600 and $2,400 per animator to get the episode animated (and that's not even getting into voice actors). This would of course all be negotiated in the contract itself.

 

If they needed to go back and change something, even a minor change, they would have to pay someone separately to do it (that work would be separate from the contract, since it wouldn't have originally been in there to begin with). Granted, yes, it is still cheaper for Hasbro to just change Derpy's eyes as you said (it's really like five minutes of work for anyone that knows Flash), but no animator would do it for free.

 

Would somebody go back and point out where I said the work would be done for free?

 

I have been observing this for a bit, but honestly, this is where your argument falls apart. The shows makers are hired to work on the show, not to make episodes. They are being paid monthly for working on the show, regardless if it is patching it up, creating new episodes, going to Bronycon, or sitting back and getting laid at work. So long as you are in the studio and are—meant to be—doing something that you are supposed to do.

 

THANK YOU!

[Drakkon 362]

And moreover, animators get paid by the hour, not by the project.

Now that I read this... I could, indeed, be wrong, that it's hour rather than monthly, but these are but minute details.

[SBaby 660]

Would somebody go back and point out where I said the work would be done for free?

 

Well, you kind of made it sound like that's what you were implying. Anyway, what I said was coming from people that work in the industry (or rather, did at one point, though I think Pat Allee might still).

[cuteycindyhoney 13,282]

and i'm the troll?

 

If not a troll, someone being intentionally obtuse. Read what Sparkle has said. Working in animation simply can't be compared to being an automobile mechanic. If you are under contract, you work on the entire show in all it's aspects. You can't say. "I finished that episode, I'm not going to touch it." Also, like I said before. Go point out where I said the animators would do the work for free. They are under contract, and get paid the same each month no matter what they do.

 

Well, you kind of made it sound like that's what you were implying. Anyway, what I said was coming from people that work in the industry (or rather, did at one point, though I think Pat Allee might still).

 

Hour weekly or monthly, it depends on the terms of your contract. You'd still get paid. I never said you wouldn't.

[SBaby 660]

They are under contract, and get paid the same each month no matter what they do.

 

I don't know where you're getting each month from though. Because animators are paid by the hour, not by the month. I do not know of ANY animator that would, in their right mind, accept being paid a fixed amount by the month. That's why the studios negotiate the contracts. Hasbro can't just walk into an animation studio, hand them a contract and say, 'Here, do this.'. If they could, I could go into the same studio and ask them to animate a cartoon for me. It just doesn't work that way. It involves collective bargaining through the Animation Guild, which involves their lawyers looking at the contracts, signing off on the NDAs, and then hiring the inividual animators. There's alot of negotiation involved in it.

 

You're making it sound like someone could just throw a piece of paper down and say, 'I want you to do this.'. If anyone tried that in that kind of context, they'd be laughed right out of the industry.

Edited March 6, 2012 by SBaby

[Drakkon 362]

 

I don't know where you're getting each month from though. Because animators are paid by the hour, not by the month. It's the studios that negotiate the contracts. Hasbro can't just walk into a studio, hand them a contract and say, 'Here, do this.'. If they could, I could go into the same studio and ask them to animate a cartoon for me. It just doesn't work that way. It involves collective bargaining through the Animation Guild, which involves their lawyers looking at the contracts, signing off on the NDAs, and then hiring the inividual animators. There's alot of negotiation involved in it.

 

Depending on what contract. Hasbro funds Studio B, and Studio B negotiates the contracts with the to-be employees. I am uncertain as to why this slight detail about work per hour rather than month is so relevant, but if you're saying this is how it works, seeing I have little knowledge of this particular subject, I'm going to trust you on this one. However, as far as I know, this is rather irrelevant to the topic at hand.

[Arashi Takamine 121]

Alright having seen this thread unfortunatly blossom from day one...Can I just post my reasoning behind everypony's outrage?

 

Derpy is in a sense the child of the fandom, we sort of nurtured her from an animation flub, to the pony she is today to the fandom, she's like the fandom's daughter basically in that sense and when she was edited it was like seeing our little girl get hurt by a group of bullies and the anger is there. Whilst she was featured in an episode as a speaking character she was a little Easter egg to find and little bits of her showed. Then when she got edited it was like one day your daughter heads off with friend's wearing clothes she likes and the next day she's dying her hair in the bathroom because it's what "everyone else will like me better with".

 

Think about it for a sec...Am I not too far off as far as the more angry, and sad comments go? Hasbro and Studio B basically gave in to peer pressure and changed something crucial to us to appease 'offended' people whom likely wanted to see us get hurt because some people think we're a cancer to the internet when they are.

 

It's like my dad's reaction to someone on a kids website I used to go on posting how they think their friend harassed them and posted the details. Rage, utter unadulterated parental rage.

 

Derpy is basically our baby is she not? She was ours long before Hasbro and the rest of the people working on the show including Lauren herself noticed.

 

I say 'ours' when saying the Brony community as a hole.

 

Go ahead flame me I don't care this is just me trying to think of a reasoning for all this anger and hate. My only conclusion is reactions to when I got sucked into peer pressure and got bullied in girl scouts. It's similar to how angry my parents were when my troop leader told them: "Because she isn't singing the line about the lord in the oath she isn't a very good girl scout, the other girls say so and agree.."

 

Basically that was Hasbro saying our Derpy wasn't good enough because she was 'offensive' and too different whilst the show's message is to premote love, friendship and acceptance.

 

It's a slap in the face to us...

Edited March 6, 2012 by Arashi Takamine

[SBaby 660]

Alright having seen this thread unfortunatly blossom from day one...Can I just post my reasoning behind everypony's outrage?

 

Derpy is in a sense the child of the fandom, we sort of nurtured her from an animation flub, to the pony she is today to the fandom, she's like the fandom's daughter basically in that sense and when she was edited it was like seeing our little girl get hurt by a group of bullies and the anger is there. Whilst she was featured in an episode as a speaking character she was a little Easter egg to find and little bits of her showed. Then when she got edited it was like one day your daughter heads off with friend's wearing clothes she likes and the next day she's dying her hair in the bathroom because it's what "everyone else will like me better with".

 

Think about it for a sec...Am I not too far off as far as the more angry, and sad comments go? Hasbro and Studio B basically gave in to peer pressure and changed something crucial to us to appease 'offended' people whom likely wanted to see us get hurt because some people think we're a cancer to the internet when they are.

 

It's like my dad's reaction to someone on a kids website I used to go on posting how they think their friend harassed them and posted the details. Rage, utter unadulterated parental rage.

 

Derpy is basically our baby is she not? She was ours long before Hasbro and the rest of the people working on the show including Lauren herself noticed.

 

I say 'ours' when saying the Brony community as a hole.

 

Go ahead flame me I don't care this is just me trying to think of a reasoning for all this anger and hate. My only conclusion is reactions to when I got sucked into peer pressure and got bullied in girl scouts. It's similar to how angry my parents were when my troop leader told them: "Because she isn't singing the line about the lord in the oath she isn't a very good girl scout, the other girls say so and agree.."

 

Basically that was Hasbro saying our Derpy wasn't good enough because she was 'offensive' and too different whilst the show's message is to premote love, friendship and acceptance.

 

It's a slap in the face to us...

 

See the thing is though, I really can't blame Hasbro for their decision to change Derpy. The ones I really blame are the people that complained to begin with. They're the ones that caused it to happen, if you ask me. And they're the biggest hypocrites.

 

Depending on what contract. Hasbro funds Studio B, and Studio B negotiates the contracts with the to-be employees. I am uncertain as to why this slight detail about work per hour rather than month is so relevant, but if you're saying this is how it works, seeing I have little knowledge of this particular subject, I'm going to trust you on this one. However, as far as I know, this is rather irrelevant to the topic at hand.

 

You are right. It does have little to do with this topic. I just don't want people that might be one day thinking of going into the industry to be misinformed. And I've got nothing against anyone I was replying to. I just wanted to clear up what looked to be some confusion about the subject.

Edited March 6, 2012 by SBaby

[Drakkon 362]

Arashi Takamine's message goes here.

 

I, to be honest, disagree. They included her in the first place, and if this is the kind of damage and attacks they endure for simply doing what they deem to be the right thing, then you can be certain we will get little to no fan shout outs or contributions from them. They believed that there were a large amount of people (despite there, in fact, isn't) that took offense at the term 'derpy', and due to a misclarification of the definition, Hasbro made edits to the episode to avoid problems. They don't care about Derpy enough to risk fighting a war for her, so I do not blame Hasbro for removing her from the show. Perhaps, at a future date, they will reimplement her, assuming they understood now that the people who complained were taking things far, far too far, and are very much less a mass than Hasbro initially thought.

 

 

You are right. It does have little to do with this topic. I just don't want people that might be one day thinking of going into the industry to be misinformed. And I've got nothing against anyone I was replying to. I just wanted to clear up what looked to be some confusion about the subject.

 

Ah, no problem!

Edited March 6, 2012 by Inactive Sparkle

[hwrogers 168]

Would somebody go back and point out where I said the work would be done for free?

 

 

as you asked, underlined for clarity of the point you've been defending;

 

If Hasbro wanted to remove Derpy for fear of reaction, it would cost far less then any feared lawsuits. Actually speaking, I don't see how it would cost anything at all to do a quick eye correct and color change. Like I said, the work would actually only take a few minutes. Look at the fan made "Epic Pie Time" (animated in Flash) The Zap Apple episode aired the day before they were going to present their anime at a convention. They had time to recolor some of the apples to rainbow hues with no trouble at all.

 

"i don't see how it would cost anything at all..." that statement, says the work would be done for free.