🔗 Share this article

A Denmark-based citizen has been found guilty of sharing nude segments from protected movies and television shows on the online platform Reddit.

According to a police report obtained by BBC News, the unnamed man posted 347 clips of explicit content in a subreddit he managed, which were then watched 4.2 million-plus times.

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

Experts explain the defendant was prosecuted under a rarely-used clause in Denmark's intellectual property legislation, with the judge ruling that by taking the footage out of their original context, the accused had harmed the performers' "ethical entitlements".

He has additionally been found guilty of sharing more than 25 terabytes of copyrighted digital content.

From March 2022 to mid-2023, the user using the alias "the pseudonym KlammereFyr" on Reddit posted adult clips featuring over 100 female performers.

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

According to the Denmark's anti-piracy organization the Rights Alliance, his subreddit had more than 6,000 members and users were encouraged to request excerpts of particular performers.

In 2023, campaigners reported the case to the police on behalf of the impacted artists, filmmakers and producers, which resulted in the forum being closed down.

One actress, one of the actresses whose nude scenes were shared in the group, explained to Danish media at the time she felt there was a distinction between being seen naked in a movie and being shown on Reddit.

The performer said the posts constituted "abuse".

'An important message'

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

In a statement following the verdict, TRA head the organization's leader remarked the decision sent an "significant" signal "indicating violations of creators' rights has repercussions".

The ruling is considered unique in the country for its application of the "moral rights" clause of the Danish Copyright Act, which states an artist's work cannot be utilized in a way which violates their standing.

Copyright law expert Dr Alina Trapova told the media the case was "unusual" for its focus on the harm to the integrity of an artist, rather than to them economically.

How the ruling could influence 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 an individual's work might be compromised much more easily".