🔗 Share this article

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

According to a law enforcement report reviewed by BBC News, the anonymous man shared 347 video excerpts of nude scenes in a subreddit he moderated, which were then viewed 4.2 million-plus times.

Danish authorities state he has been handed a 7-month deferred jail term for violating copyright laws.

Experts explain the man was prosecuted under a seldom-invoked clause in Danish intellectual property legislation, with the court ruling that by taking the scenes 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 protected digital content.

From March 2022 to mid-2023, the user using the alias "KlammereFyr" on Reddit posted adult clips including over 100 actresses.

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

Per the Denmark's anti-piracy organization The Rights Alliance (TRA), his subreddit had more than 6,000 members and participants were prompted to request clips of particular actors.

In 2023, campaigners filed the case to the police on behalf of the impacted actors, directors and production companies, which resulted in the forum being closed down.

Andrea Vagn Jensen, one of the performers whose explicit content were shared in the group, explained to local media at the time she believed there was a difference between being seen unclothed in a movie and appearing on Reddit.

The actress said the posts constituted "abuse".

'A significant signal'

The man was detained in fall 2024 and admitted culpable to the allegations recently.

In a comment after the ruling, TRA head Maria Fredenslund remarked the outcome sent an "important" signal "that violations of artists' entitlements has repercussions".

The verdict is considered unprecedented in Denmark for its application of the "moral rights" section of the Danish Copyright Act, which states an artist's creation cannot be utilized in a way which violates their standing.

Intellectual property specialist Dr Alina Trapova told the media the case was "unusual" for its focus on the damage to the dignity of an artist, rather than to them financially.

The extent to which the ruling could influence other countries is unclear.

But she added there may be "more and more of such cases" in the future with the advancement of AI, where "the integrity of an individual's work might be compromised much more easily".