Sure, but even from a purely hard-nosed business perspective, burning the character is a dead loss for everyone. I guess you have to avoid creating a situation where the talent has an incentive to tank the company, but realistically I don't think anyone is profiting off of their corpo collapsing even if it means they end up with their IP.Nobody in this industry is a good samaritan, there are simply models and business dealings.
Of course a company with creditors can't give the IP away while they're already bankrupt, but if a company would, IDK, put a binding "IP reverts to the talents in the event the company is unable to continue as a going concern" clause in the contract, and use that as a justification for taking a 2% higher cut, I'm pretty sure everyone would be better off. The value of $10k if the company crashes and burns is pretty low, companies can and do sell it for pennies - but only if they're selling it before that crash becomes inevitable.
I don't think we need to take that as a given. It's still a young industry and there's still room for experimenting with different business models and different ways of doing things. Things haven't played out the way upd8 wanted it to or thought it would; Holo and Niji have evidently hit on a model that works, but that doesn't mean it's the only way that can ever work.This is how vtubing works
Or people didn't think it made a difference. If it's not worth it for a big company to negotiate terms, it's probably not worth it for a small company either. You can argue that a big parent company has a reputation to protect whereas a small independent company should be willing to destroy its reputation on the way out, but that doesn't feel terribly compelling.Of course, the argument can be made that the company bean counters figured it would be better to write them off as a loss instead of going through the hassle (and bad PR) of negotiating terms for the IP, but this didn't really register in the minds of the community.