🔗 Share this article

A Danish man has been convicted of sharing nude scenes from protected films and television shows on the online site Reddit.

Based on a police report reviewed by media outlets, the anonymous man shared 347 clips of nude scenes in a subreddit he managed, which were then viewed 4.2 million times.

The country's authorities confirm he has been handed a 7-month deferred jail term for violating copyright laws.

Legal analysts say the man was prosecuted under a seldom-invoked provision in Danish copyright law, with the judge ruling that by taking the footage out of their original context, the man had harmed the artists' "moral rights".

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

From March 2022 to mid-2023, the man using the alias "KlammereFyr" on Reddit uploaded sexually explicit clips including over 100 female performers.

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

Per the Danish copyright protection group The Rights Alliance (TRA), his subreddit had more than 6,000 subscribers and users were encouraged to ask for clips of specific performers.

In last year, advocates reported the incident to the authorities on behalf of the affected artists, directors and producers, which resulted in the subreddit being closed down.

Andrea Vagn Jensen, among the performers whose explicit content were circulated in the group, told Danish media at the period she felt there was a distinction between appearing unclothed in a film and appearing on Reddit.

The performer said the posts amounted to "abuse".

'A significant signal'

The defendant was detained in September 2024 and pleaded culpable to the allegations recently.

In a comment after the ruling, TRA head Maria Fredenslund remarked the decision sent an "important" signal "indicating violations of artists' rights has consequences".

The ruling is viewed as unique in Denmark for its use of the "moral rights" clause of the Danish Copyright Act, which states an artist's work cannot be utilized in a way which infringes upon their standing.

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

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

But she said there may be "more and more of these actions" in the coming years with the growth of AI, where "the sanctity of one's creative output might be compromised with greater ease".