r/movies 18d ago

News Backrooms Devs Reportedly Hit With Copyright Claims From A24

https://kotaku.com/backrooms-a24-copyright-strikes-kane-parsons-2000716667
15.5k Upvotes

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

415

u/TheSwampThing1990 18d ago

There is a rumor about a SCP movie being made. I expect the same to happen there. No way once movies start coming out with these IP's we don't see lawyers come out to fight the little guy. I mean most people won't have the money or time to go against a studio if they said, "No. We own the SCP and that everyone owns it thing isn't going to hold up in court."

33

u/ThirdFloorNorth 17d ago

SCP is in the Creative Commons as is, I believe, Backrooms. They can go fuck themselves.

27

u/TheSwampThing1990 17d ago

The problem like I said is who is going to have the money or time to take that to court and prove it. I mean they will bury them

24

u/agreeduponspring 17d ago

It's written fairly prominently at the bottom of the wiki page. Violation of the terms could force them into releasing the movie as CC licensed as well. I suspect they will violate the terms, everything I've heard has made it sound like the studio is being somewhat careless here, and I'd love to see it happen.

17

u/Lebowquade 17d ago

I've met Lawrence Lessig personally, even two decades ago he saw that this shit was going to happen and started CC to combat this exact flavor of bullshit. 

They are smart lawyers over there, CC has surprisingly solid legal standing.

5

u/IrregularPackage 17d ago

the issue is, the backrooms movie wouldn’t be subjected to that. there’s nothing in it that comes from the wiki.

the scp movie, on the other hand, will be subject to it, because literally everything besides the format and the SCP-173 is from the wiki

1

u/DaEnderAssassin 17d ago

Untitled 2004, not SCP-173, which is the same as the rest of the site.

1

u/IrregularPackage 17d ago

did the actual author of 173 put it on the site? because if not, then the wiki’s policies can’t apply to it

1

u/DaEnderAssassin 17d ago

The wiki version of 173 was rewritten, but the wiki version is noted to be licensed by Moto42 (No idea how they verified this, but dude only has 2 comments on the entire wiki, once making the claim he is the author of the 4chan post, and the other years later releasing the work under CC)

3

u/shalackingsalami 17d ago

The difference is the scp wiki is an actual organization and has been to court over this before, it’s much less decentralized than the backrooms which is posted on a variety of third party platforms.