🔗 Share this article

A Denmark-based citizen has been convicted of uploading sexually explicit segments from protected films and TV series on the social media platform Reddit.

According to a police report obtained by media outlets, the anonymous individual posted 347 video excerpts of explicit scenes in a Reddit group he moderated, which were then watched 4.2 million-plus times.

Danish authorities confirm he has been handed a 7-month deferred jail term for copyright infringement.

Legal analysts say the defendant was charged under a seldom-invoked provision in Denmark's copyright law, with the court ruling that by taking the scenes out of their original context, the accused had harmed the performers' "ethical entitlements".

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

From March 2022 to May 2023, the man known as "the pseudonym KlammereFyr" on Reddit uploaded sexually explicit clips including over 100 female performers.

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

According to the Danish copyright protection organization the Rights Alliance, his subreddit had more than 6,000 subscribers and participants were encouraged to request excerpts of particular performers.

In 2023, advocates filed the case to the police on behalf of the impacted artists, filmmakers and producers, which resulted in the subreddit being closed down.

Andrea Vagn Jensen, among the performers whose nude scenes were circulated in the community, told local media at the time she felt there was a difference between appearing naked in a movie and being shown on Reddit.

The performer said the posts constituted "abuse".

'A significant signal'

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

In a statement following the verdict, TRA head Maria Fredenslund remarked the outcome sent an "important" message "indicating infringements of creators' rights have consequences".

The ruling is viewed as unprecedented in Denmark for its use of the "ethical protections" clause of the national copyright law, which specifies an artist's creation cannot be utilized in a way which infringes upon their standing.

Intellectual property expert a legal scholar told BBC News the case was "rare" for its emphasis on the damage to the dignity of an performer, rather than to them economically.

How the ruling could affect nations abroad is unclear.

But she said there may be "an increasing number of these actions" in the future with the advancement of AI, where "the sanctity of one's work might be tempered with much more easily".