The short version
- A24's planned SCP Foundation movie faces immediate criticism from the wiki administrators who created the content.
- The project conflicts with Creative Commons ShareAlike licensing rules that prohibit exclusive commercial rights.
- Legal experts suggest the film may be unviable under traditional distribution models without abandoning the brand.
A24 is encountering significant resistance regarding its upcoming entry in the V/H/S horror anthology series, which is set within the universe of the SCP Foundation. The studio had hoped to capitalize on the momentum generated by its previous success with the Backrooms film, another project rooted in internet folklore. However, the announcement of this new installment has sparked immediate controversy, placing the studio’s reputation at risk among online creative communities.
The core of the dispute lies in the nature of the SCP Foundation itself. Unlike traditional intellectual property owned by a single entity or corporation, the SCP universe is a sprawling, collaborative work hosted on a wiki. It functions as a collection of fictional documents detailing the containment of paranormal anomalies, written in the style of bureaucratic records. This format has cultivated a dedicated following and established specific rules for how the material can be used.
Administrators of the SCP Foundation Wiki have expressed frustration over the studio’s approach. According to statements from wiki officials, including administrator DrEverettMann, the filmmakers made no effort to communicate with the community despite repeated attempts by the admins to reach out. This silence stands in stark contrast to A24’s handling of the Backrooms project, where the studio worked directly with the original creator of the YouTube series that inspired the film.
The legal implications are as complex as the community relations. The SCP Foundation operates under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license. This specific licensing framework allows anyone to distribute or create derivative works based on the content, but it imposes strict conditions. Any adaptation must also be released under the same terms, meaning it cannot be locked behind exclusive commercial rights.
Anna Tumadóttir, CEO of Creative Commons, clarified that while commercial use is permitted, adaptations must remain open for others to copy and redistribute. For a major studio production, this requirement creates a fundamental conflict with standard business practices. A24 would need to release the film under compatible licensing terms, allowing anyone else to stream or distribute it without restriction.
Paul Szynol, a law professor at the University of Michigan and Villanova, noted that while A24 is free to produce and exhibit the film in theaters, they cannot prevent others from making their own adaptations or redistributing the studio’s version. This lack of exclusivity undermines the traditional theatrical window, which relies on limited access to drive ticket sales.
DrEverettMann highlighted the practical difficulties of this model for a commercial release. If audiences know they can legally download the film for free at home, the incentive to pay for theater admission diminishes significantly. The usual exclusivity that protects studio investments would not apply, making the financial viability of the project highly uncertain.
A24 and its partners, Image Nation Studios and Spooky Pictures, have attempted to clarify their position. A spokesperson stated that the studio’s rights pertain only to the specific film being produced, not the broader universe. However, this distinction does not resolve the licensing conflict. Legal experts warn that proceeding without adhering to the ShareAlike terms could result in the project being deemed unauthorized and infringing.
The situation leaves the studio with limited options. They could proceed and face potential legal challenges, which experts suggest could effectively kill the project. Alternatively, A24 might abandon the official SCP branding while retaining inspiration from the source material, a strategy previously used by other commercial works seeking to navigate similar copyright complexities.
Sources behind this briefing
Go to the original reporting
- The Verge↗A24’s reputation is on the line with the SCP Foundation movie
