A24's 'SCP' Film Faces Licensing Crisis, Reputation at Risk

Overview

A24 has recently announced plans to produce V/H/S: SCP, a horror anthology film, aiming to capitalize on the commercial potential of online horror trends once again following the massive success of The Backrooms. However, the project has been mired in a significant licensing crisis since its official announcement, sparking strong backlash from the community.

The SCP Foundation is a collective creative creepypasta universe originating from 4chan, with content protected under the Creative Commons BY-SA 3.0 (Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike) license. This means that any commercial adaptation based on this material must be released under the same terms and cannot claim exclusive rights. Although A24 claims to hold "worldwide exclusive rights," this fundamentally conflicts with open-source licensing agreements from a legal standpoint.

Lack of Community Communication and Copyright Disputes

Although A24 collaborated with creator Kane Parsons on The Backrooms project—and faced subsequent copyright disputes—it made no communication efforts toward the SCP community this time around.

“To the best of our knowledge, we have not been able to make contact with the filmmakers, producers, or distributors, nor has any attempt at contact been made on their part.”

The SCP Foundation Wiki explicitly stated in its declaration that the official community was unaware of the project and that repeated attempts to make contact had failed. Administrators such as DrEverettMann confirmed that this lack of dialogue has intensified antagonism between both sides, damaging fan relations and violating the community’s long-standing principles of open collaboration.

Licensing Dilemmas and Contradictions in Business Models

According to Anna Tumadóttir, CEO of the Creative Commons Alliance, the CC BY-SA 3.0 license permits anyone to use the material commercially, provided that derivative works are released under the same license, original authors are credited, and no exclusive distribution rights are claimed.

“Unless a separate agreement is reached with the copyright holders, studio films like this must be released under CC BY-SA 3.0 or a compatible later version… anyone is free to redistribute or stream it under the same terms.”

Professor Paul Szynol from the University of Michigan Law School pointed out that under this model, A24 cannot prevent other parties—such as Netflix or individual users—from producing similar adaptations or redistributing the film. Such a scenario is highly unusual within the mainstream Hollywood studio business model, making it difficult for the film to recoup its costs through traditional exclusive theatrical windows.

Potential Pathways and Future Directions

Currently, A24 and its partners Image Nation Studios and Spooky Pictures face a difficult choice. On one hand, pushing forward with the project while ignoring licensing requirements could invite legal action, potentially derailing the production entirely. On the other hand, fully complying with the CC agreement would mean foregoing the ability to establish exclusive commercial barriers.

A more plausible option involves abandoning direct use of the SCP brand and instead drawing inspiration from its "institutional records" style of storytelling, similar to how earlier novels adapted from works by SCP contributor QNTM were handled. Alternatively, a bolder approach would be to officially release the film under the BY-SA license, betting on the notoriety of the title to attract audiences, although this would surrender legal control over content distribution. In any case, A24’s reputation is facing a severe test as a result of this controversy.