It’s not every day that an obscure corner of the internet finds itself at the centre of a Hollywood showdown, but it seems like that’s exactly what’s happening with the SCP Foundation: a sprawling, fan-built horror wiki that has been growing online since 2008.
Earlier this month, A24 announced it had acquired a film based on the SCP Foundation from Spooky Pictures and Image Nation Studios, and the news was meant to bring one of the internet’s biggest collaborative horror worlds to the big screen. Instead, it sparked concerns from the community that helped build it – particularly around what could happen if a Hollywood studio attempted to claim exclusive control over material that was created collectively online.
And now, fellow indie film studio Neon has entered the chat. It has announced its own SCP Foundation film, which it plans to release as an “open-source horror project” under a Creative Commons licence. And suddenly, the story of a strange internet horror phenomenon has become a much bigger question about who gets to own the stories we create, online, together.
What exactly is the SCP Foundation?
Think of SCP as a giant, collaborative horror universe built by the internet.
The Wiki began back in 2008 and centres on a fictional secret organisation called the SCP Foundation, whose job is to contain and study mysterious, supernatural and otherwise anomalous entities and objects. Thousands of writers and creators across the globe and internet have contributed to the world-building on the platform over the years, crafting an enormous mythology that exists across stories, films, games and other fan-made projects.
But because there isn't just one author behind it all, it begs the question: who owns the creative IP?
Why did A24’s movie cause a stir?
When news broke that A24 was bringing an SCP Foundation movie to cinemas, the SCP Foundation Wiki Licensing Team raised concerns about the possibility of an exclusive studio project being made from community-generated material that comes with specific licensing requirements.
SCP itself isn't conventional Hollywood intellectual property – its history is rooted in an open, collaborative model, where creators have been able to build upon the work of others under its licensing framework.
So everyone is currently asking: what happens when a major film studio enters a universe that was never really designed to have one person or company own it?
Why is Neon now making a SCP movie as well?
Neon’s answer to the question is, essentially, what if the movie stayed "open", too? The studio says its SCP Foundation project will be released under a Creative Commons licence, which means the film and related materials won't be locked away as an exclusively controlled Hollywood property.
Under the licence, other creators will be able to copy, share, screen, build upon or adapt the work once it's released – including commercially – as long as they follow the licence conditions. Those include crediting the original creators and filmmakers, releasing adaptations under the same licence and not claiming an exclusive distribution arrangement.
Neon has also been communicating with the SCP Wiki team to make sure the film's distribution aligns with the community's mission and licensing guidelines.
So what's the beef between Neon and A24?
Basically, Neon says development on its project was already underway before A24's announcement, so this isn't necessarily a case of the studio suddenly creating a rival film in response. But the timing is undeniably intriguing. Both studios are now developing SCP Foundation movies, with both expected to head towards theatres next year (2027).
Exactly who will contribute to Neon’s film, and which project will reach cinemas first, remains unclear.
Will the original SCP Foundation creators be credited?
The SCP Foundation is an unusually pure example of internet culture creating something that eventually becomes valuable enough for Hollywood to want a piece of it. Its existence raises a question that is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore: when a story belongs to thousands of people, what does it mean for a corporation to adapt it?
Neon’s open-source approach doesn't erase those questions, but it is directly acknowledging the collaborative DNA of SCP rather than treating it like a conventional piece of studio-owned IP.
Could open-source movies actually become a thing?
Well, that's the experiment Neon is trying out right now. Hollywood has spent decades operating around the idea of controlled intellectual property: studios own the rights, audiences consume the finished product, and derivative works require permission.
But as we know, the internet has never really worked that way. And with A.I. copyright issues dominating the news, it's particularly ripe for discussion.
Fan fiction, remix culture, memes, mods and collaborative storytelling have all blurred the line between creator and audience. SCP is perhaps one of the clearest examples of what can happen when that model is embraced from the beginning.
