🔗 Share this article

A Danish man has been found guilty of uploading sexually explicit scenes from protected movies and TV series on the social media site Reddit.

Based on a police document reviewed by BBC News, the unnamed individual shared 347 clips of explicit content in a Reddit group he managed, which were then watched 4.2 million times.

Danish authorities confirm he has been given a seven-month deferred sentence for copyright infringement.

Experts say the defendant was charged under a seldom-invoked provision in Denmark's copyright law, with the judge ruling that by removing the footage out of their intended setting, the accused had damaged the performers' "moral rights".

He has additionally been convicted of distributing more than 25 TB of copyrighted data.

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

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

Per the Danish anti-piracy group the Rights Alliance, his online community had more than 6,000 subscribers and participants were prompted to ask for excerpts of particular performers.

In last year, campaigners reported the case to the police on behalf of the affected actors, directors and production companies, which led to the subreddit being shut down.

Andrea Vagn Jensen, one of the actresses whose explicit content were circulated in the community, explained to Danish broadcasters 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 amounted to "abuse".

'An important message'

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

In a statement after the ruling, the head of the Rights Alliance the organization's leader said the decision sent an "important" signal "indicating violations of artists' entitlements has consequences".

The ruling is viewed as unique in Denmark for its use of the "ethical protections" clause of the Danish Copyright Act, which specifies an artist's work cannot be used in a manner which violates their reputation.

Copyright law specialist a legal scholar informed BBC News the legal matter was "rare" for its emphasis on the damage to the dignity of an artist, rather than to them economically.

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

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 compromised with greater ease".