🔗 Share this article

A Denmark-based citizen has been found guilty of sharing sexually explicit segments from copyrighted movies and TV series on the social media site Reddit.

According to a police document reviewed by BBC News, the anonymous man shared 347 clips of nude scenes in a subreddit he managed, which were then watched 4.2 million times.

Danish authorities state he has been handed a 7-month suspended sentence for copyright infringement.

Experts say the defendant was prosecuted under a rarely-used 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 terabytes of protected data.

From spring 2022 to May 2023, the user using the alias "the pseudonym KlammereFyr" on Reddit posted adult scenes featuring over 100 female performers.

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

Per the Danish copyright protection organization the Rights Alliance, his subreddit had more than 6,000 subscribers and users were encouraged to ask for clips of specific actors.

In last year, advocates reported the incident to the authorities on behalf of the impacted artists, directors and producers, which led to the subreddit being shut down.

Andrea Vagn Jensen, one of the performers whose nude scenes were circulated in the community, explained to Danish media at the time she believed there was a difference between being seen naked in a movie and appearing on Reddit.

The actress said the uploads constituted "abuse".

'An important signal'

The man was arrested in September 2024 and admitted culpable to the charges last month.

In a statement after the ruling, the head of the Rights Alliance the organization's leader remarked the decision sent an "significant" signal "that violations of creators' rights have repercussions".

The verdict is viewed as unprecedented in the country for its use of the "moral rights" section of the Danish Copyright Act, which states an artist's work cannot be used in a way which violates their reputation.

Intellectual property expert a legal scholar informed the media the legal matter was "rare" for its emphasis on the harm to the integrity of an artist, rather than to them financially.

The extent to which the ruling could affect nations abroad is unclear.

But she said there may be "an increasing number of these actions" in the future with the growth of AI, where "the sanctity of one's work might be compromised much more easily".