🔗 Share this article

A Danish citizen has been convicted of sharing sexually explicit segments from copyrighted movies and television shows on the social media platform Reddit.

Based on a police document obtained by media outlets, the unnamed individual posted 347 video excerpts of nude scenes in a subreddit he managed, which were then watched 4.2 million times.

Danish police confirm he has been handed a 7-month suspended sentence for copyright infringement.

Legal analysts say the man was charged under a seldom-invoked provision in Denmark's copyright law, with the court ruling that by removing the footage out of their original context, the man had harmed the artists' "ethical entitlements".

He has additionally been found guilty of distributing more than 25 TB of protected data.

From spring 2022 to mid-2023, the user using the alias "KlammereFyr" on Reddit posted sexually explicit scenes including over 100 actresses.

He distributed them in the forum he was a administrator of.

According to the Denmark's anti-piracy group the Rights Alliance, his subreddit had more than 6,000 subscribers and participants were prompted to ask for clips of specific performers.

In 2023, advocates reported the case to the police on behalf of the impacted artists, directors and production companies, which resulted in the subreddit being closed down.

One actress, one of the performers whose explicit content were shared in the community, explained to Danish media at the time she felt there was a distinction between being seen unclothed in a movie and appearing on Reddit.

The actress said the uploads amounted to "abuse".

'A significant message'

The man was detained in fall 2024 and pleaded guilty to the charges recently.

In a comment after the verdict, TRA head the organization's leader said the decision sent an "important" message "that violations of artists' rights have repercussions".

The verdict is viewed as unprecedented in Denmark for its application of the "moral rights" clause of the Danish Copyright Act, which states an artist's work cannot be utilized in a manner which infringes upon their reputation.

Intellectual property specialist a legal scholar told the media the legal matter was "rare" for its emphasis on the damage to the dignity of an artist, rather than to them economically.

The extent to which the case could influence other countries is unclear.

But she said there may be "more and more of these actions" in the coming years with the growth of AI, where "the integrity of an individual's creative output might be compromised with greater ease".