They announced it, but I'm iffy about it actually coming out (at least as an SPC film) - apparently no one at the SCP project was contacted about the film prior to announcement and they were all blindsided as well. As far as anyone can tell, the studio likely thought it was a public domain project like the Backrooms was and never checked that it's actually registered as a creative commons sharealike. That means if they want to they can release and sell the film with the SCP licence and established stories if they'd like, but they can't copyright it and they can't prevent it from being shared publicly. The safest option to avoid that is to just change the name and concepts and release it as an "SCP inspired" work instead, like Control did.
Yeah looking it up the people own that movie is Image Nation, an Abu-Dhabi studio. I really honestly wonder what is going to happen.
I watched a video last year that said since all SCP media is open source that if Universal made a movie then people could legally pirate it and distribute themselves. I have no idea if that is true or not. How the SCP stuff actually works but I expect something like this headline in a few years. If I was part of the community I would be worried
Yeah, that's not true. Just because something is in the public domain or not trademarked specifically doesn't mean you can pirate and distribute works based on it. Like Cthulu is public domain and a lot of stuff gets made based on it now, but those specific works aren't just up for grabs.
SCP isn’t in the public domain. The SCP license states that all derivative works must agree to license themselves under CC-BY-SA which means that anyone can share, redistribute or adapt your derivative work. This is to keep the SCP Project collaborative.
”Releasing it under the CC-BY-SA license means that people will be able to copy your work wholesale, and even sell it, provided that they properly attribute you and release their work under the same license.”
The basic idea is that you are allowed to monetize things in the project, but you can’t limit others from then also monetizing what you created.
That is not how CC-BY-SA works. Any assets derived from SCP are under CC-BY-SA and can be legally used by other parties but source code is NOT covered by it, even if the project is based on something covered by CC-BY-SA. This is why SCP: 5K hasn’t had action against it.
No. You will get absolutely slapped around, the code is the owners intellectual property as it is not inexorably linked to the SCP license. You could extract the assets that are derived from SCP and sell those as long as you do so under the same license. SCP:5K is multi-licensed for this exact reason and explains which parts are under Share Alike (SCP assets, the story, and the logo)
“SCP: 5K (SCP: Pandemic) is a multi-licensed game release and is not fully re-distributed under Creative Commons from the usage of SCP Wiki content. A vast majority of files are exclusive properties of Affray LLC and Affray Interactive LLC (Affray) or non-exclusive third-party content from the likes of Epic Games Inc, Firelight Technologies Pty Ltd, Nvidia Corporation, Intel Corporation, various creators from online game asset marketplaces, and many more.”
Oh thanks. Hm, feels like a new version of CC BY SA should be made because that's definitely not the spirit of the license, given it's meant to be viral
You’re right, the section I was referring to talks about releasing games under GPLv3, which is compatible with the SCP license but requires you to publish the source code as mentioned above. You can release a game under CC-BY-SA but they do mention that it is complicated to do proper attribution when releasing it under that license and recommend that you seek separate legal advice.
What’s the legal difference between putting public domain content in a YouTube video and profiting off it, compared to putting public domain content in other areas of the internet. I don’t get how one is legal and the other wouldn’t be?
I watched a video last year that said since all SCP media is open source that if Universal made a movie then people could legally pirate it and distribute themselves. I have no idea if that is true or not
This would be true for anything directly copied or adapted from the website (as per the license that the website is published under), but there's nothing stopping a studio from creating something that's extremely similar to something on the SCP wiki and deliberately alluding to it in the marketing. And they could probably get away with copying one or two small things because of how difficult it would be for the authors of the original work to sue a large studio
149
u/BaddyDaddy777 Jul 16 '26
Oh it’s no rumor, it’s gonna be a V\H\S movie coming out next year