🔗 Share this article

A Denmark-based citizen has been found guilty of uploading sexually explicit scenes from protected films and television shows on the online site Reddit.

According to a law enforcement document reviewed by BBC News, the unnamed man posted 347 clips of nude content in a subreddit he moderated, which were then watched 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 defendant was prosecuted under a rarely-used clause in Danish copyright law, with the judge ruling that by taking the footage out of their original context, the man had harmed the performers' "moral rights".

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

From spring 2022 to May 2023, the man known as "KlammereFyr" on Reddit posted sexually explicit scenes including over 100 actresses.

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

Per the Denmark's anti-piracy group The Rights Alliance (TRA), his subreddit had more than 6,000 members and users were encouraged to request excerpts of particular actors.

In last year, campaigners reported the incident to the police on behalf of the affected artists, filmmakers and producers, which resulted in the subreddit being shut down.

One actress, among the performers whose nude scenes were shared in the group, explained to Danish broadcasters at the time she felt there was a difference between being seen unclothed in a film and being shown on Reddit.

The actress said the posts constituted "exploitation".

'A significant signal'

The defendant was detained in fall 2024 and admitted guilty to the charges recently.

In a statement following the verdict, TRA head the organization's leader remarked the outcome sent an "significant" message "indicating violations of creators' entitlements have consequences".

The ruling is considered unique in the country for its use of the "moral rights" section of the national copyright law, which states an artist's work cannot be utilized in a way which infringes upon their reputation.

Intellectual property expert Dr Alina Trapova told the media the legal matter was "rare" for its emphasis on the damage to the integrity of an performer, rather than to them economically.

How the ruling could affect other countries is unclear.

But she said 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 creative output might be compromised with greater ease".