You can say not used any more just as readily as not used any longer, but it is no more used seems quite wrong compared to it is no longer used. Why?
- Anybody can ask a question
- Anybody can answer
- The best answers are voted up and rise to the top
For the sense "not used anymore", one could say "It is used no more". ngrams for no longer used,used no more,not used any more,not used anymore,not used any longer [listed in descending order of frequency and shown in first figure below] shows that usage of no longer used has increased substantially in the last 200 years or so. Looking closer at ngrams for the latter four terms [as in second figure] shows used no more still ahead of the other three; and in the last 15 years, not used anymore has overtaken not used any more.
Looking at book links from the second ngrams, one will see frequent usage in the 1800's of no more used, in just the way that you suggest seems wrong. Most of the more-recent instances of the phrase in the links are artifactual (e.g.: "...if there are no more used memory blocks..."). Part of the problem with "it is no more used" as you have it above is that it may lead one to expect a comparison that is not forthcoming. Given a comparison, there's no grammatical problem, although phrasing remains clumsy. Example: "Brand B is no more used than is brand A."