🔗 Share this article

A Denmark-based man has been found guilty of sharing nude segments from copyrighted films and TV series on the online site Reddit.

Based on a police report obtained by BBC News, the unnamed individual posted 347 clips of explicit content in a Reddit group he moderated, which were then watched 4.2 million-plus times.

Danish authorities confirm he has been given a seven-month suspended jail term for violating copyright laws.

Legal analysts say the defendant was charged under a seldom-invoked clause in Danish copyright law, with the judge ruling that by removing the footage out of their intended setting, the man had harmed the performers' "moral rights".

He has also been convicted of distributing more than 25 terabytes of copyrighted data.

From March 2022 to May 2023, the man using the alias "KlammereFyr" on Reddit uploaded adult clips including over 100 actresses.

He distributed them in the subreddit he was a moderator of.

Per the Denmark's anti-piracy group The Rights Alliance (TRA), his online community had more than 6,000 subscribers and users were prompted to ask for clips of specific performers.

In last year, campaigners filed the incident to the authorities on behalf of the impacted artists, directors and producers, which resulted in the subreddit being shut down.

Andrea Vagn Jensen, among the performers whose nude content were shared in the community, told Danish broadcasters at the period she believed there was a difference between being seen unclothed in a film and appearing on Reddit.

The performer stated the uploads amounted to "abuse".

'A significant signal'

The defendant was arrested in fall 2024 and pleaded culpable to the allegations last month.

In a statement following the verdict, the head of the Rights Alliance Maria Fredenslund remarked the decision sent an "important" signal "that infringements of creators' entitlements has repercussions".

The verdict is considered unique in the country for its use of the "ethical protections" section of the Danish Copyright Act, which states an creator's creation cannot be utilized in a manner which infringes upon their reputation.

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

The extent to which the case could affect nations abroad is uncertain.

But she said there may be "an increasing number of these actions" in the future with the advancement of AI, where "the sanctity of one's creative output might be tempered with with greater ease".