🔗 Share this article

A Denmark-based man has been convicted of sharing sexually explicit segments from protected films and television shows on the social media site Reddit.

Based on a law enforcement document reviewed by media outlets, the unnamed individual shared 347 clips of nude content in a subreddit he moderated, which were then viewed 4.2 million-plus times.

Danish police state he has been given a 7-month deferred sentence for violating copyright laws.

Experts say the man was charged under a rarely-used provision in Denmark's copyright law, with the court ruling that by taking the footage out of their original context, the accused had damaged the artists' "moral rights".

He has also been found guilty of distributing more than 25 terabytes of copyrighted digital content.

From spring 2022 to mid-2023, the man known as "KlammereFyr" on Reddit uploaded sexually explicit clips including over 100 actresses.

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

Per the Denmark's copyright protection group the Rights Alliance, his subreddit had more than 6,000 members and participants were prompted to ask for clips of specific performers.

In last year, advocates reported the incident to the police on behalf of the affected artists, filmmakers and production companies, which led to the forum being closed down.

Andrea Vagn Jensen, one of the performers whose nude content were shared in the group, told Danish broadcasters at the time she believed there was a difference between being seen unclothed in a movie and being shown on Reddit.

The actress said the posts constituted "abuse".

'A significant message'

The man was detained in September 2024 and pleaded guilty to the allegations last month.

In a statement following the verdict, TRA head the organization's leader said the outcome sent an "important" signal "indicating infringements of artists' rights has repercussions".

The ruling is considered unique in the country for its application of the "moral rights" clause of the national copyright law, which states an artist's creation cannot be utilized in a manner which infringes upon their standing.

Intellectual property specialist 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 other countries is unclear.

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