Site-42

A24 “V/H/S: SCP” Movie Update - A24 Speaks to Kotaku (but not SCP Wiki Staff?)

Duration: 8:12 1360 transcript words EN summary

Video summary

A24 has issued a significant update regarding their upcoming film project within the VHS franchise, clarifying that they hold worldwide rights to the next installment but explicitly deny any intention to claim exclusive ownership over the SCP Foundation universe or its core concepts. A spokesperson stated that the project is designed as a tribute to the community that built the SCP world rather than an assertion of copyright over the foundation itself. The company emphasized that they are not seeking to prevent others from creating their own SCP-based works, suggesting that their legal strategy focuses on the specific expression of ideas rather than the underlying concepts, which generally fall outside the scope of copyright protection. The discussion delves into the legal nuances of using the title "SCP" without utilizing protected lore, characters, or specific organizational structures like D-Class designations or Keter classifications. Experts in the conversation suggest that A24 may be attempting to navigate a gray area by using the cultural association and initials of the SCP Foundation while creating an organization with a completely different name and backstory within the film. This approach mirrors past instances where other media, such as the game *Control*, utilized the title "Federal Bureau of Control" instead of directly copying the SCP Foundation's lore to avoid copyright infringement while still capitalizing on the established cultural recognition of the term. Despite these legal maneuvers, there is growing concern among community members that A24 has not yet engaged directly with the SCP Wiki staff to clear licensing issues, which some view as a potential risk to their legal standing. Critics argue that if the film relies heavily on the "vibe" or initialism of SCP without official collaboration, it might be considered merely an adjacent work rather than a legitimate adaptation, potentially undermining the community's efforts to protect the integrity of the franchise. The consensus among commentators is that while A24 may successfully keep their copyright shield intact by avoiding direct lore usage, they should still communicate with the wiki to ensure transparency and avoid future legal complications that could jeopardize the project's status as an official SCP film.

Read the full video transcript

We have an update on the film scenario, people. Update. September 12th, 2026, 5:22 p.m. Eastern time. A spokesperson for A24 told Kotaku that their company is not asserting any right to prevent others from creating their own SCP based works and that VHS SCP is intended to be a tribute to the greater SCP universe. A24's worldwide rights cover the next film in the in the VHS franchise, reads A24 statement. It is not a claim of exclusivity over the SCP Foundation universe or its concepts. We're not showing any right to prevent others from creating their own SCP based works. The project is in development and is meant as tribute to the community that created this world. I'm going to call out this user on Twitter who tagged me to tell me about this during stream. Thank you user at John Hollowawok on Twitter for alerting me and I like their color commentary so I'm going to read it verbatim. Okay, I think I figured out what A24 is doing. Copyright only protects specific expressions of ideas, intangible works of art. Copyright doesn't normally protect things like near titles or ideas. So, for instance, the idea of a shadowy organization that catalogs anomalous materials and creatures and things is not copyright protectable. What I believe is going on here is that they are merely using the title SCP without using any of the stories from the wiki. Nor are they using any of the copyrightable material from how the organization is structured. No D-Class, no Keter Uclid designations or05. None of it. Aha. But you say they are calling it VHS SCP. That's true. But if that's all they are doing while the org in the film is called something completely different. Tangent from me. do remember canonically in the SCP universe, they're not called the SCP Foundation. They're called the Foundation. Just a funny misnomer. Everyone calls it the SCP Foundation. The original version was just called the Foundation. So many people called it the SCP Foundation that it's kind of stuck. That's true. But if that's all they are doing, while the or in the film is called something completely different, then they might be able to get away with taking the vibe of SCP and even the initialism without running a foul violating the creative common license. Copyright doesn't normally protect titles alone. For instance, how many knockoff films are named something like their progenitor studio films. That's why they are calling it a tribute to SCP while avoiding any of the actual SCP lore characters or content. They are using the cultural association and the title without any of the underlying works. And it probably be able to keep full copyright protection. That would also explain why they haven't talked with site 42 or anyone at the wiki because then they'd be exposing themselves to copyright liability. If they directly collaborate with the wiki, they're giving the game away and their shield falls. Very, very Trixie. I am curious, can they get away with using SCP as their title in that sense when going to use this off-brand organization? I say this because it's already been done in the past. We have the work of the game control. They already did off-brand SCP different enough that they could copyright it. And that's why it's the FBC, Federal Bureau of Control. My question becomes, is it an SCP movie or not? How close are they going to skim this line legally? I wonder how that stands. Of course, this is now the ball in Wiki staff's court. Sort of. A24 didn't talk to the wiki. They talked to Kotaku. It would be again pertinent to the interest of everyone involved if A24 and the VHS SCP team cleared everything up directly with SCP Wiki staff to make sure the licensing is correct because again, that's the only thing at issue. And reminder, if it is an SCP film in the way that it involves the SCP's copyright and creative common license, then these worldwide rights that cover the next film in the VHS franchise might be fraught. Now, if they're going to go for that different enough to be copyright free route, then the question is, is calling it VHS SCP different enough? If they don't use the SCP Foundation name, if they're just using those three letters disambiguated from SCP, the Foundation, does that work? I don't know. Again, not a legal mind, not a lawyer. This is between the SCP Foundation staff and the studios. I want to know what's up. Heck of an update. Uh Tro suggests they might be using the SCP title as a working title. Could be. So, in essence, our projects will be fine, but now it's not a matter if if they use the SCP property or not. It was never really in my head that they would try to copyright SCP and take ownership of it. That was a worst case scenario that if the SCP wiki failed to defend its copyright and there was a lawsuit and we lost and we lost so hard that they could take our copyright, it was never likely. It was the worst worst worst case scenario. I always figured our SCP projects would be fine. But I am concerned about how they're inter how and if they are interfacing with us and still keeping their copyright as I think they are trying to do. Reminder control couldn't call it SCP or at least didn't call it SCP and they wanted to thank SCP in the credits of their game. At least I've heard this I don't remember where I heard this so take this with a grain of salt. control the game wanted to thank the SCP Foundation in their credits and legal told them not to because it would be admitting too much inspiration. It might be a copyright issue. So they steered very clear. I mean Teenag got away with it. But Dr. Frogman like control there is no anti-mimetics division. They did change all of the SCP lore out of it and kept the name. They did keep the name. They did keep the name, which means VHS SCP could keep the name and just get rid of the SCP lore. Maybe. Again, not a lawyer, just pontificating, goofing, guessing, thinking out loud. There's also the case that I don't believe SCP Wiki had reason to pursue one of their most prominent authors and one of the most prominent series that the SCP community has put out to mainstream success. It would still make money regardless of whether or not it was faithful or just inspired by SCP. Yes, it probably will. But for me, I'm out in this these streets to get SCP movies made legit legitimately. That's what I'm fighting for personally. So once they file the serial numbers off for copyright, that takes away from my personal interest because it's not an SCP movie anymore. It's an SCP adjacent movie. The Cabin in the Woods is an SCP adjacent movie. Secret organization containing deities and monsters. It's cool. I love it. But I love it more if it was SCP. You know what I mean? That's all I'm saying. They removed all SCP lore from the second run of There is no anti-Mmetics Division, but it is still called There Is No Anti-Mimetics Division, which is the name of the series of stories on the SCP database. So, even though they stripped all the SCP lore, they kept the title. That's what I was saying. Good news, everyone. The internet response did foster a response from A24. This John person mentioned that maybe they're not talking to the wiki cuz they want to avoid looking too interlin, but it is now more to me. They should talk to staff to clear the legal air. And that's all. Like I said, that's all just to clear the legal air. That's what they should do, I think. Okay, good. Breaking news. I'm not exactly sure what it means yet. I hope we get more intel.