A24 presents “V/H/S SCP” Movie - Should the SCP Community be worried?

So, for today's briefing, we are running a complete timeline of this SCB Foundation movie that was announced by Spooky Pictures Studios in collaboration with Image Nation Abu Dhabi. And the greater news that has just come up is that A24, the indie horror darling, has announced that they will be distributing the film in theaters worldwide. Great joy, celebration, I say not at all sarcastically and worried. Starting at the very beginning of this timeline, a reminder that everything I have said today about the SCP movie situation and SCP Wiki staffs is my opinions cited from the information I have based on the press releases from the studios as well as from SCP Wiki staff. I am not privy to SCP Wiki staff's conversations. I'm not in them. So, all I can do is from what I observe from the outside speak on what I have seen said. And as far as I know, the situation is SCP Wiki just wants to make sure the license is right. That is what I think is happening. And if further information comes out that changes that, I will tell you when I find out about it. I am not an authority on this. I am just a content creator reporting on what I sees. We have the initial variety article announcing headline VHS franchise sets new Roy Lee and Steven Schneider produced movie based on SCP Foundation Universe exclusive. So, what Variety announced is that Spooky Pictures, the people behind the VHS franchise of horror films, announced that they are working with global film and television studio Image Nation Abu Dhabi to release VHS SCP. Now, they are using the SCP name. A lot of people are wondering, okay, are they doing like control? Are they going to rework file the serial numbers off? As of now, they are not claiming that that's going to be the case. They are claiming that this is going to be a legitimate SCP project. The featurelength project is the latest installment in the long-running VHS found footage horror franchise and the first featurelen addition to the online collective fiction project, the SCP Foundation. So, they've done their VHS movies. They're going to make an SCP one. And a lot of people would say, "Hey, SCP as an anthology film makes a lot of sense. We have so many stories. Why not pick a couple of them? make shorts and cobble it together into a film. Sounds like a great idea. And the VHS franchise makes mid to good horror films. Seems like a match made in heaven. But of course, there's one question at hand here. The first question we all asked when this was announced. Do they really know about the SCP Foundation's Creative Common license? And more importantly, are they going to follow it? You see, Hollywood has ignored the SCP Foundation for a very long time because we are a creative common community. And what that means is that you're allowed to use our work freely. You're allowed to monetize our work cuz we have the kind of creative common license where you're allowed to monetize your work that you make of our work and you don't even have to pay royalties to us. They can keep all the money. That's legal. But they do have to do one thing though. one thing that Hollywood has not really wanted to do, which is you have to release your work via the same license. That means you actually can't release it on DVD or Blu-ray because there can't be copyright protection. There can't be copy protection on there. I mean, it means that as soon as they distribute the movie, it will be ripped. It will be uploaded to YouTube a million times for free, and there's nothing really that can be done about it. Now, Keter Labs made this case. I've also been making this case, but Keterlab made it more succinctly and so I'm crediting them. They probably also made it first now that I'm thinking about it. But due to streaming rights and streaming killing the home video market in the first place, this whole creative comments thing might not actually be that a big a deal because look at what happened with the back rooms earlier this summer. The backrooms made nearly a billion dollars in theaters. Who needs DVDs and Blu-ray sales that don't even exist if you could do the theater model? If you can get SCP into a theater, if you can get people to come out and watch that thing, you make all your money in the theaters, the creative commons doesn't matter. So, this seemed like gold. This is what Keter Labs was going to do with SCP Contain Breach the movie. This is where I'm aiming with the site 42 project is to get these films into theaters. That way, we make the money to make more things. That is our hope right now that they'll do this right. But unlike the Backrooms movie who worked with Cain Parsons, unlike the Siren Head movie that was announced who talked to Trevor Henderson, unlike the Mandela Catalog movie who talked to Alex Kister and got [ __ ] Steven Spielberg on board, are you kidding me? All of these horror properties, online horror properties that got snapped up in the back rooms rush, they had deals with their original creators and the studios. Now, because of our creative comments, the VHS team doesn't legally need to talk to us at all. They don't have to. I want you to keep that in mind because that is the only hope in my heart is that they legally didn't have to talk to us and so they didn't because of the creative comments. But I will tell you why. Continuing on, we're starting to get more worried about this. After this announcement, some people in the SCP sphere started to get less excited. They got less excited for a couple of reasons. First and foremost, obviously we're worried about if they're going to use a license. While I was digging into the UAE ties to Image Nation Studios Abu Dhabi, I discovered a lesser circulated press release from Image Nation Studios, not reported in Variety the same way as the Spooky Pictures one. The Image Nation Studios website has a press release about VHS SCP and this one gives us a little more context on the VHS SCP movie. First and foremost, it is saying specifically that VHS SCP will build on the vast collaborative mythology of the SCP Foundation. So, this is giving more credence to the fact that they're not going to file the serial numbers off like Control did, which reminder, I don't hate Control. In fact, I loved the game. It's just I would prefer it if these things were actually SCP rather than taking and changing the names so you can keep the copyright. I feel like contributing to the collaborative community is a good thing here. Continuing on, they also say in Image Nation's press release, "The new VHS feature will adapt the found footage concept that has defined the franchise since its 2012 debut, reframing it as recovered field documentation. Video evidence gathered, redacted, and archived by a secretive containment organization." Now, that said, by a secretive containment organization, that could not be SCP. The anthology's multi-director structure will showcase standalone segments, each built around a different anomalous object, entity, or event unified by an overarching containment breach frame narrative. Get ready. All entities, incidents, and documentation featured in the film are original creations developed for this production, inspired by concepts from the SCP Foundation, SCPwiki.wiki.com, licensed under creative comments by SA3.0. Now, I swore my memory redacted this. I guess that it said this was video evidence gathered, redacted and archived by the [snorts] secretive containment organization, which would have confirmed they were using SCP. Instead, they are saying by a secretive organization. So, that lends credence to maybe they're filing the serial numbers off. We don't know because they've said they're naming it SCP. Remember, VHS SCP is what they named it. So, we're getting mixed signals is what I'm saying. Then we have radio silence from July 7th, 2026 to now. Yesterday, SCP Wiki staff this entire time has been trying to reach out through different channels to the VHS team, either through Spooky Nation Studios or Image Nation Studios. I personally wrangled three to five different contact routes to give to SCP Wiki staff to reach out to and use to reach this studio set. And by I mean personally, I mean I use my contacts in the SCP uh community. Different filmmakers had different routes to get there. I believe Lot One Productions, creators of the SCP Redacted miniseries on YouTube, gave me a contact or two. There was a bunch. And so I don't have film industry contacts. What I have is contact with people who have film industry contacts. I did not raise any stink about this on social media because I've been waiting for SCP Wiki staff to get in contact with the movie crew. And as a month went by, and as a second month went by, I'm getting a little nervous, I wonder what's going on. Maybe I should poke SCP Wiki staff and be like, "Hey, do you ever get a hold of those guys? Did you do you know what's going on? I was going to contact them next week." Well, it seems like now's the time. Fast forward to yesterday. reported in Deadline A24 is teaming with Spooky Pictures and Image Nation Studios to bring the SCP Foundation, one of the internet's largest fan-built horror and science fiction universes to the big screen for the first time. Again, that sounds like it's an SCP movie, not serial numbers filed off. Now, the deadline article in question, if you want to look up the headline, A24 boards SCP Foundation movie from Spooky Pictures and Image Nation sets 2027 release. Here is the phrase that has everyone nervous. Uh, again, I I'll start at the beginning cuz it's literally the second paragraph we're worried about. So, paragraph 1 starts, exclusive A24 is teaming with Spooky Pictures in Image Nation studios to bring the SCB Foundation, one of the internet's largest fan-built horror and science fiction universes to the big screen for the first time. And then it says, taking worldwide rights to the project, an untitled extension of the VHS horror series, A24 is targeting a 2027 theatrical release, taking worldwide rights to the project. A24. What do you mean by that, bro? Image Nation mentioned the CC by SA 3.0 license clearly in their press release, which tells me that they know about it. They know which one it is. That gave me hope that they were going to follow the license. Even if we hadn't heard of them, they know the exact license. They're paying attention. Now, A24 is saying they've got worldwide rights. What does that mean? Please tell me this is just a casual meaning of hey, we're taking the burden of distributing and taking the money from it. That'll be fine. Uh, are they just saying that Image Nation Studios and Spooky Pictures have given us the rights to distribute their film and no one else? That could be fine. Okay, you've got a deal between Spooky Nations and Imag uh Spooky Pictures and Imagation and A24 that they will be the sole distributors of the movie in this contract. That's okay. But reminder, we're dealing with a creative common work where free piracy is on the menu. So, you have the deal with them. That's great. You are aware of the Creative Commons, right? and that this is going to go uh all over the place pretty quickly. Friday 24, the Deadline article continues to talk about the film and the installments, the people making the film, uh talking about the SCP Foundation's history, talking about the success of the back rooms that makes people want to go for this. Uh a uh spooky pictures and Image Nation talk about why they're trying to tap the SCP universe like they did in their previous in their previous press releases. But once again, A24 said worldwide rights. The SCP Wiki staff wants a clarification. Now, reminder, legally, Imagination, Spooky Pictures, and A24 do not have to talk to SCP Wiki staff if they are following the Creative Commons properly. That's what Creative Commons is for. Copyright means you have to ask permission. Creative Commons lets you keep your copyright, but it provides a route for people to use your work without having to ask. That's what creative commons is. Not relinquishing copyright, but setting a direct path that says if you follow these rules, you don't have to ask me. You can just do it. You have to follow the license. Otherwise, it's null and void and the copyright holder can come down on you and revoke your rights to use the copyright. That's the legal situation we're watching out for right now. They don't have to reach out to us if they follow the license, but we sure would enjoy it if they did communicate that they were following the license. Right now, yesterday, this news comes out while I'm at my day job busy. But I do send a quick message to SCP Wiki staff to say, "Hey, you guys seeing this? What do you want me to say? Something about it? I'm the Sherman's copacetic propaganda wing of the SCP community, self-proclaimed. So, do you guys want me to say something about this yet? And they're like, "No, hold back. We're talking to the AV Club, the uh online news group, the AV Club. We're going to talk to them and put out a statement." They thought it was going to take a day or so. AV Club sniped that and put it out immediately. And so the AV Club drops the SCP wiki statement. A24 somehow making an SCP movie without anybody from the SCP Foundation involved is the AV Club's headline. The SCP Foundation wiki is not involved with the film in any way, representatives for the online horror collective said of A24's just announced VHS SCP. Now I can read the AV Club article, but I am now going to toss instead to the SCP Wiki's official statement on the SCP database. The SCP Wiki has put out an official statement. The staff and authors of the SCP Foundation Wiki, the real life writing project behind the SCP Foundation universe and its official home, were not consulted or contacted regarding this film. We've been attempting to contact the filmmakers but haven't yet been successful. To be clear, we have not had any communication with the filmmakers, producers, or distributors for this project despite our best efforts. And to the best of our knowledge, they have not made any efforts to contact us. Furthermore, A24 does not and cannot have any exclusive rights to anything related to the SCP Foundation, including any films that Spooky Pictures or anyone else may choose to create. the SCP Foundation. All SCPs and related concepts, characters, etc. are under the creative common attribution share alike CC by SA 3.0 license. It allows for the production of derivative works whether commercially or otherwise subject to certain restrictions. This is broadly similar to the situation with some open- source software such as Linux, although legal specifics differ. The sharelike aspect means that creators of derivative works are obligated to release those works under the same CC by SA 3.0 or higher. As well, many fans have created adaptations of the original project by utilizing the rights guaranteed by our license, including unofficial SCPs, cartoons, dramatic readings, and more. A24, Spooky Pictures, and other involved companies would be able to distribute the film to theaters, stream it online, etc. However, they would not be permitted to distribute the film with DRM or other effective technological measures that would prevent it from being copied. They would not be able to establish any sort of exclusivity with respect to distribution. Just as anyone who follows the license can redistribute and create derivative works based on the SCP Foundation articles on our wiki, anyone will be able to do the same with their film. For example, anyone could upload a copy to YouTube. Similarly, any commercial streaming service would be free to stream the film without payment to anyone. This is why despite prior interest, no Hollywood films have been created using SCP material. They do not have the ability to prevent any of the other interested parties from creating their own works based on the SCP Foundation universe or its adaptations, including their film. Similarly, they would not be allowed to impose any terms on theaters that would prevent them from making copies of the film. in conjunction with the above, we would expect to see the film on YouTube on its premiere date, if not before. And if anyone were to violate this license, that person or organization would lose all rights to distribute any works derived from the SCP Foundation wiki. These are not the only terms of our license, but they are among the most relevant to this situation. We'd love to sit down with A24, Spooky Pictures, and other involved parties to discuss options for how they could make and distribute a film while complying with CC by SA. We chose to release our project under a creative common license to allow fans to tell their own stories as well as adapt ours. We chose the sharelike license to ensure that everyone who enjoyed those fan works would have the same rights as the people who created them. We hope that the filmmakers will follow their legal obligations under our license. Please direct all media inquiries to media sciki.com. And as a reminder from the SCP Wiki staff, it is also noted that nobody should reach out to A24, Spooky Pictures, Image Nation Studios Abu Dhabi on behalf of the SCP Wiki staff. It is between the studio and the SCP Wiki staff. Do not reach out on their behalf, please. So that is the SCP Wiki's statement. This was shared on AV Club. Of course, it was also has now spread to Gizmodo and Kotaku. This is going viral just as the A24 movie news has gone viral because of course this is a little bit of drama and everyone loves a little bit of drama. That is our current timeline of knowledge on the situation. What we also know that's very important to pay attention to is the differences in the copyright/trademark situation between the SCP movie situation and other previous internet horror properties being snapped up. In the case of Siren Head, the character was owned by its creator, Trevor Henderson. A deal had to be made with Trevor Henderson to make that movie. Copyright locked down. Easy. The back rooms was a 4chan post just like the SCP wiki was. And that 4chan post, as far as anyone knows, has not been copyrighted or claimed by anyone. The anonymous poster, we don't know who they are, apparently. So the backrooms wiki which released itself creative commons derivative of the backrooms post is creative commons like the SCP wiki is but Kane Parsons's backroom series based off that post is not creative commons and so what you have there is a family tree situation. The post goes to Kane Parsons. post goes to the back rooms wiki and that's why A24 could claim rights on Kane Parson's stuff after a deal with Cain Parsons its actual owner. The SCP wiki, SCP Foundation as a whole as a concept started on 4chan as a post. But the difference is we know who made that post. And the person who made that post very specifically released the concept of the SCP Foundation to the Creative Commons under the stewardship of the SCP wiki which means this is not a backroom situation where there is a non-copyrighted or a non-creative com version. You can use the SCP wiki from that 4chan post was released creative commons. Everything derivative is under that creative common license. As far as my understanding goes, I'm not a lawyer. I'm only reporting what I have been told, what I have seen, and as I understand it. So, right now, the wait is on. And unlike the first time around in July, now the news sites are circulating the SCP wiki's response. We're going a bit viral. And as a final, my understanding estimation here, the SCP Wiki isn't asking for money. They aren't asking to contribute to the film in any way. They're not asking for our authors to be consulted. Now, would I like some of these things? Sure, maybe. But that's all of that the SCP wiki is not asking for. The wiki just wants to have a conversation to clarify that the CC by SA 3.0 license will be dutifully followed by Spooky Pictures, Image Nation, and A24. If the legal issues are cool, then a lot of people are going to get very excited. That is the current situation timeline. VHS movie announced, Wiki Staff reaches out, doesn't hear back. A24 announces they're partnering with that movie. Now, the wiki has made a public statement and they are trying to reach out. Let's see what happens.