"Simple. Anything Joe makes for Matel belongs to Matel, not Joe. Joe is not the IP holder, Matel is. Matel hired Joe to create a doll, and paid him whatever was agreed to in the contract. It doesn't matter how many millions or billions Matel makes off of Joe's work, they only owe him the ammount Joe agreed to when he signed the contract."

Might not be the best example, but I was trying to explain a view from what I was getting from the post, now if I misinterpreted the post I am sorry, it might be I didn't see the vision expressed clearly or personal judgement of views might be conflicting and blinded something I may have missed.

That was the exact point I was trying to make, to a degree, but with the perspective of a content creator making something for someone else to use for commercial use, then turning around and wanting more revenue because the model made the artist using it more money than the person selling it did. I do understand the frustration, with how this could play out, but how many times has someone come up with a good idea, sold the rights to a company, and the company make good off of the idea. Technically it is the same Idea, just in a different format, with more involved than just handing over the complete rights of usage, the goal is seeking out a medium ground to make this vision possible.