People generally always want the artist to have control.

What people don't want, as in this case, is for a corporation to have control of the artist's work, and exercise that control mercilessly, thus actually reducing the reach and impact of the artist's work.

(Often, unknowingly to the corporation's own detriment. Having your cars appear in a game is literally free marketing, why refuse that?)

The engineers at the car company that designed the body in the first place are also artists.

They have as much control over this as I do, i.e. none at all.

Probably copyright needs to be amended to belong to an individual or a team that comprises not more of 5 people. No corpos can hold copyright or if they do, they must upfront declare the individual/team that holds it.

The artist is allowed to be a group of people, or sell their art to another person or group of people, who then get the same control.

The problem is not a matter of artist control. Rather, it's a problem with how license agreements are handled--license agreements for product-breaking things with timeframes should generally not be permitted. It's a version of planned obsolescence.