Well technically it's not fan art if said fan is commercially profiteering off other people's IP. I know it's an extremely sensitive topic in the 1/6 community, but we shouldn't get mad when IP holders are doing nothing more than protecting their properties from being stolen.
Bold of a 3rd party company to use the actual trademark name no?
I think that's what's confused and intrigued me most by this whole ordeal. Third-party figures are a common thing, yeah? Us in the 1/6 community pretty much rely on them to produce figures the official license holders decide aren't worth their interest or commitment. That's also typically why third-party companies make darn sure they tag their products WITHOUT copyrighted titles and branding. We'll seek out our "Doomsday Flashman" or "Night Vigilante" or "Hell Commander" or whatever they decide to call them to avoid drawing unwanted attention from the IP holders.
The Alice situation is frustrating but interesting because it tells me several things.
1) This third-party company got sloppy. I think they underestimated the amount of attention their product would get and didn't cover their tracks well. By using official branding and directly mentioning the game in several product descriptions, they convinced a lot of public outlets and retailers into thinking this was a licensed product when it wasn't. Big sites were reporting on this new Alice merch, and a store like BBTS assumed it was legit. It literally was branded with the "Alice: Madness Returns (tm)" logo.
2) This is a rare case of a character creator directly sounding off on the product being made. Regardless of your opinions of McGee, I also 100% agree with many of his critiques of the figure (which I'm sure were necessities for a third-party maker). If you're going to do an Alice figure, he would want it to be with his oversight, on his terms, and not sexualize her in ways he is ardently opposed to. He would like nothing more than to put out more Alice merch, but that decision isn't his. EA holds the IP rights, and they SHOULD do something with it. Thus, like most normal third-party situations, a smaller unofficial product is being made to fill the void (but didn't go about it the normal third-party way, generating confusion).
3) Even 10 years later, Alice fans really want more of McGee's Alice, however they can take it. They want a new game. They want new merchandise. You don't get third-party figures made for unwanted characters. Upon revealing the figure's existence, many fans got excited and wanted to buy it (most of us in this thread too, I imagine). The noise was so loud and passionate that it put far more of a spotlight on this one third-party offering than normal (again, news reports, creator response, BBTS listing it, etc.). Unfortunately, that meant the reality came out and official retailers yanked the figure and nuked the product page from orbit. This kind of interest, 10 years later, SHOULD be the type of kick in the pants a company like EA would need to maybe, you know, do this officially and take a closer look at the next Alice game potential.
What a weird situation all over. Mostly, I'm still bummed that the figure is $50 more expensive everywhere else, because $250 would have been my sweet spot. $300 for an unlicensed figure is a big ask (it's literally the absolute limit of my self-imposed price restrictions for collecting). There are official Hot Toys figures that don't go for that price, which led credence that it was somehow properly licensed.
