🔗 Share this article

A Danish citizen has been found guilty of sharing sexually explicit segments from copyrighted films and TV series on the online site Reddit.

Based on a police report reviewed by media outlets, the anonymous individual posted 347 clips of explicit scenes in a subreddit he managed, which were then watched 4.2 million times.

The country's police confirm he has been given a 7-month deferred jail term for copyright infringement.

Experts explain the man was prosecuted under a rarely-used provision in Danish intellectual property legislation, with the court ruling that by taking the footage out of their intended setting, the man had harmed the artists' "moral rights".

He has additionally been found guilty of sharing more than 25 terabytes of protected data.

From spring 2022 to May 2023, the man known as "KlammereFyr" on Reddit uploaded adult clips featuring over 100 female performers.

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

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

In last year, advocates filed the incident to the authorities on behalf of the impacted artists, filmmakers and producers, which led to the subreddit being closed down.

One actress, among the performers whose nude scenes 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 constituted "exploitation".

'A significant signal'

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

In a comment after the verdict, TRA head the organization's leader remarked the decision sent an "important" signal "indicating violations of creators' entitlements has consequences".

The verdict is viewed as unique in Denmark for its use of the "ethical protections" clause of the national copyright law, which specifies an creator's creation cannot be used in a way which violates their standing.

Intellectual property specialist Dr Alina Trapova told the media the case was "rare" for its emphasis on the harm to the dignity of an artist, rather than to them economically.

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

But she added there may be "an increasing number of these actions" in the coming years with the growth of artificial intelligence, where "the sanctity of an individual's work might be compromised much more easily".