>>6821203>It's more likely that his likeness rights were tied up with his role in the Fantastic Four movies, having nothing to do with Hasbro/Marvel and more to do with Fox.You're as clueless as the other guy.
Hasbro gets the license for all the movie toylines.
The only time they've never used a likeness is with the Pursuit of Cobra toyline, which was originally part of the GI Joe movie license. They didn't feel like paying Paramount the royalties was worth it, so they stopped using Channing's likeness for Duke and switched the toy's storyline to being a non-movie line.
Basically, it's all or nothing. When they make a Captain America or Human Torch figure based on the movie, they're paying royalties to Marvel/Fox/etc. Again, their license rights include likeness and Fox wouldn't get royalties from a Marvel Studios design/actor, because that's seperate from Fox's license. Actors switch studio jobs all the time and an actor would have to be barred altogether from working at another studio if there was such a contract signed (non competitive clauses)
Your belief is as silly as saying Hasbro couldn't use Samuel Jackson's likeness for Fury because his likeness rights are also with Star Wars and Hateful 8.
Again, likeness issues with huge movies like Avengers or Star Wars is only because of sculptors not doing a good enough job.
It's basically impossible that likeness rights weren't included with these huge licenses.
