🔗 Share this article

A Danish citizen has been convicted of sharing nude scenes from copyrighted movies and television shows on the online site Reddit.

Based on a police document obtained by BBC News, the unnamed man shared 347 video excerpts of nude scenes in a subreddit he moderated, which were then watched 4.2 million-plus times.

The country's police state he has been handed a 7-month suspended sentence for copyright infringement.

Legal analysts explain the man was charged under a seldom-invoked provision in Denmark's copyright law, with the judge finding that by removing the footage out of their intended setting, the accused had damaged the artists' "moral rights".

He has also been convicted of sharing more than 25 TB of protected data.

From spring 2022 to mid-2023, the user known as "KlammereFyr" on Reddit uploaded sexually explicit scenes featuring over 100 female performers.

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

Per the Denmark's copyright protection group The Rights Alliance (TRA), his online community had more than 6,000 subscribers and users were encouraged to ask for excerpts of particular performers.

In last year, campaigners filed the case to the police on behalf of the impacted artists, filmmakers and production companies, which led to the subreddit being closed down.

Andrea Vagn Jensen, among the performers whose nude content were circulated in the community, told local broadcasters at the time she felt there was a distinction between being seen unclothed in a movie and being shown on Reddit.

The performer stated the posts amounted to "exploitation".

'An important signal'

The defendant was arrested in fall 2024 and admitted guilty to the charges last month.

In a statement after the ruling, the head of the Rights Alliance the organization's leader remarked the decision sent an "important" message "indicating infringements of artists' rights have consequences".

The ruling is considered unique in Denmark for its use of the "ethical protections" section of the Danish Copyright Act, which specifies an creator's work cannot be used in a way which violates their standing.

Copyright law specialist Dr Alina Trapova informed BBC News the case was "rare" for its emphasis on the harm to the dignity of an artist, rather than to them financially.

How the case could influence other countries is unclear.

But she said there may be "more and more of such cases" in the coming years with the advancement of AI, where "the sanctity of one's creative output might be tempered with much more easily".