Neon Plans a 2027 SCP Movie Under an Open License, While A24 Takes a Different Path
Neon announced its own SCP Foundation movie for theaters in 2027, with a pledge to release the film under the Creative Commons ShareAlike (CC BY-SA) license, which lets others reuse the work if they give credit and share under the same terms. The Verge
Neon contacted the SCP Foundation Wiki team about the project in advance. That outreach, and the license pledge, frames how the Wiki administrators describe the effort.
The film is not an official SCP film. No Wiki staff are involved in writing or producing it, and the Wiki team is not receiving compensation for it. Its position is not to endorse projects such as Neon's movie.
At the same time, the admin team said it appreciates Neon's communication and commitment to follow the license requirements and collaborative spirit. No endorsement. No participation. No payment. Acknowledgment that the process was followed.
A separate SCP Foundation movie project was announced by Spooky Pictures and Image Nation Studios as boarded by A24, with a theatrical release planned for 2027 via A24. Deadline That project has been identified as a V/H/S: SCP movie. The Verge
A24 announced its work on an SCP Foundation film without contacting the Wiki team and without committing to a Creative Commons license. The Verge
The Wiki team said it chose a Creative Commons license to allow fans to tell their own stories and adapt its stories. SCP Wiki
The broader context here will be familiar to anyone who has maintained an openly licensed codebase with commercial users. Permission is already granted. Direct contact, clear handling of license terms, and respect for collaborative norms shape whether a community treats reuse as legitimate, even when endorsement and payment are absent.
In my view, having two studio projects pointed at 2027 turns an abstract licensing discussion into a practical comparison. One paired its announcement with outreach and a ShareAlike commitment. The other proceeded without that contact and without a license commitment, as described in the most recent reporting. The films will compete on execution. The production histories will inform how other studios approach wiki-sourced, collaboratively authored material.
Looking at what this enables for makers and audiences, a theatrical feature under CC BY-SA lowers friction for reuse in ways a conventional all-rights-reserved release does not. Translation, remix, and adaptation are part of the stated purpose of the Wiki's license choice. That does not settle questions of quality or continuity. It does expand what others can legally build next.
Worth flagging here, the Neon arrangement clarifies what compliance without endorsement looks like at studio scale. No staff involvement. No compensation. No official status. Communication plus a public license pledge was enough to draw a civil acknowledgment rather than a dispute. For technology teams used to contribution guidelines and codes of conduct, the pattern is legible. Legal permission gets a project started. Social handling determines how it lands.
The final point here is straightforward. Open licensing was designed to permit this kind of independent reuse. Whether audiences get two very different SCP films in the same year is now a matter of production schedules, not permission slips.
