Selected year snapshot
For 1999, the active event in this file is Lov nr. 395 af 14. juni 1995 om ophavsret (Act on Copyright 1995).
60%
Current rationale
The 1995 Act was a consolidation and restatement of Danish copyright law. The research-relevant exceptions remained substantially the same: Section 12 (private copying for any person, single copies, private use only, with exclusions for architecture, industrial art copies, digital computer programs, digital databases); Section 16 (institutional copying by libraries/archives/museums); Section 22 (quotation). No fair dealing, fair use, general research exception, or TDM exception was introduced. The most permissive exception for a researcher remains Section 12 (private use), yielding LIGHT BLUE.
Exceptions considered
Private copying: any person may make single copies of a published work for private use. Excludes architectural works, industrial art copies, computer programs in digital form, digital databases.
Institutional copying by libraries, archives, museums for preservation, collection completion, and limited supply of copies to users (articles/short sections for research).
Quotation from published works in accordance with proper usage and to the extent required by the purpose.
Law changes
Ophavsretsloven (Act on Copyright 1995, Consolidated Act No. 194 of 11 March 1997 reflecting earlier law)
Baseline · Effective 1990-01-01
60%
Relevant section: Section 12, Section 16
Dates: Effective 1990-01-01
Why this score
The most permissive research-relevant exception in force around 1990 was Section 12 (private copying). It permits any person to make single copies for private use, covering full works (except architectural works, works of art by industrial processes, computer programs in digital form, and digital databases). This is a private/personal use exception — it restricts the beneficiary to individuals acting privately and does not authorize sharing or communication. Section 16 provides institutional copying rights for libraries/archives/museums but is narrower in scope (limited to specific institutional purposes under Order No. 876 of 1997, including single copies for research use and copies of articles/short sections for users). There is no general fair dealing or fair use clause, no open three-step-test enabling clause, and no TDM exception. The quotation right (Section 22) permits only short quotations. Section 12's private use exception is the most permissive for a researcher wanting to copy full works, but it is restricted to private use only. The exclusion of computer programs and digital databases from Section 12 would suggest ORANGE, but since the core private-use restriction (individual only, no sharing) is more restrictive than the work-type exclusion, the classification is LIGHT BLUE. Note: The actual text in force on 1990-01-01 was the Ophavsretsloven as consolidated before the 1995 restatement. The 1995 Act (No. 395 of 14 June 1995) was a consolidation/restatement. The private copying provision (Section 11 in the older numbering, Section 12 in the 1995 Act) existed in substantially similar form. The English text shown is from the 1995 Act on WIPO Lex, which is the earliest full verified text available.
Exceptions considered
Private copying: any person may make single copies of a published work for private use. Excludes architectural works, industrial art copies, computer programs in digital form, digital databases.
Libraries, archives, museums may make copies for preservation, completion of collections, and may provide single copies of articles/short sections to users for research. Limited to institutions and to partial works for user supply.
Quotation: permits quoting from a published work in accordance with proper usage and to the extent required by the purpose.
English rendering
Section 12. (1) When a work has been made public, any person may make single copies for his private use; such copies must not be used for any other purpose. (2) The provision of subsection (1) shall not confer a right to: (i) construct a work of architecture; (ii) make a copy of a work of art by casting, by printing from an original plate or stone, or by any other process by which copies may be produced in an industrial manner; (iii) make a copy of a computer program in digital form; (iv) make a copy in digital form of databases in digital form.
Source links
Lov nr. 395 af 14. juni 1995 om ophavsret (Act on Copyright 1995)
Relevant update · Effective 1995-07-01
60%
Relevant section: Section 12, Section 16, Section 22
Dates: Effective 1995-07-01 · Enacted 1995-06-14
Why this score
The 1995 Act was a consolidation and restatement of Danish copyright law. The research-relevant exceptions remained substantially the same: Section 12 (private copying for any person, single copies, private use only, with exclusions for architecture, industrial art copies, digital computer programs, digital databases); Section 16 (institutional copying by libraries/archives/museums); Section 22 (quotation). No fair dealing, fair use, general research exception, or TDM exception was introduced. The most permissive exception for a researcher remains Section 12 (private use), yielding LIGHT BLUE.
Exceptions considered
Private copying: any person may make single copies of a published work for private use. Excludes architectural works, industrial art copies, computer programs in digital form, digital databases.
Institutional copying by libraries, archives, museums for preservation, collection completion, and limited supply of copies to users (articles/short sections for research).
Quotation from published works in accordance with proper usage and to the extent required by the purpose.
English rendering
Section 12. (1) When a work has been made public, any person may make single copies for his private use; such copies must not be used for any other purpose. (2) The provision of subsection (1) shall not confer a right to: (i) construct a work of architecture; (ii) make a copy of a work of art by casting, by printing from an original plate or stone, or by any other process by which copies may be produced in an industrial manner; (iii) make a copy of a computer program in digital form; (iv) make a copy in digital form of databases in digital form.
Source links
Lov nr. 1051 af 17. december 2002 om ændring af ophavsretsloven (Implementation of InfoSoc Directive)
Relevant update · Effective 2002-12-22
60%
Relevant section: Section 12, Section 16
Dates: Effective 2002-12-22 · Enacted 2002-12-17
Why this score
Denmark transposed the EU InfoSoc Directive (2001/29/EC) through Act No. 1051 of 17 December 2002, which entered into force on 22 December 2002. This amendment modified the private copying provision (Section 12) and the library/institutional exception (Section 16) but did not introduce a general fair dealing, fair use, or research exception. Section 12 continued to permit private copying by any person for private use, with the same exclusions. The amendment refined the digital copying rules and added provisions on technological protection measures. No TDM exception was introduced. The most permissive research-relevant exception remained Section 12 (private use), yielding LIGHT BLUE. The institutional exception under Section 16 was also updated but remained limited to specific institutional purposes.
Exceptions considered
Private copying: any person may make single copies for private use. Excludes architecture, industrial art copies, computer programs in digital form, digital databases. Amended to address digital copying more specifically.
Institutional copying by libraries, archives, museums — updated but still limited to institutional purposes.
Quotation right — unchanged.
Lov nr. 1228 af 18. december 2012 om ændring af ophavsretsloven (Amendment regarding digital library services)
Relevant update · Effective 2013-01-01
60%
Relevant section: Section 16, Section 16a, Section 16b
Dates: Effective 2013-01-01 · Enacted 2012-12-18
Why this score
The 2012 amendment expanded the library/institutional exceptions, including provisions for digital access on dedicated terminals (Section 16b). However, these institutional provisions remained limited to specific institutional contexts and did not create a general research exception. Section 12 (private copying) remained the most permissive general exception for researchers. No TDM or fair dealing exception was introduced. Classification remains LIGHT BLUE.
Exceptions considered
Private copying for private use — unchanged from prior version.
Institutional copying and digital access by libraries, archives, museums — expanded but still limited to institutional purposes and on-premises terminal access.
Quotation right — unchanged.
Lov nr. 1171 af 8. juni 2021 om ændring af ophavsretsloven (Implementation of DSM Directive Articles 15 and 17)
Relevant update · Effective 2021-06-07
60%
Relevant section: Section 12(5), Section 52a-52e
Dates: Effective 2021-06-07 · Enacted 2021-06-08
Why this score
The 2021 amendment implemented Articles 15 and 17 of the DSM Directive (2019/790) into Danish law, introducing provisions on press publishers' rights and online content-sharing service providers. It did not implement the TDM exceptions (Articles 3 and 4 of the DSM Directive) at this stage. The private copying exception (Section 12) and institutional exceptions (Section 16) remained unchanged in substance regarding research use. No general research, fair dealing, or TDM exception was introduced. Classification remains LIGHT BLUE.
Exceptions considered
Private copying for private use — unchanged.
Institutional copying by libraries, archives, museums — unchanged.
Quotation right — unchanged.
Source links
Lov nr. 1563 af 12. december 2023 om ændring af ophavsretsloven (Implementation of remaining DSM Directive provisions including TDM)
Relevant update · Effective 2024-01-01
60%
Relevant section: Section 11b, Section 11c
Dates: Effective 2024-01-01 · Enacted 2023-12-12
Why this score
The 2023 amendment transposed the remaining provisions of the DSM Directive into Danish law, including the TDM exceptions. Section 11b implements Article 3 of the DSM Directive (TDM for research organisations and cultural heritage institutions for scientific research — no opt-out). Section 11c implements Article 4 (general TDM exception for any user, subject to rightsholder opt-out). Both provisions cover 'reproductions and extractions' — these are acts of reproduction, not communication/sharing/making available to the public. Section 11b is limited to specific institutional users (research organisations, cultural heritage institutions) for scientific research — this is PURPLE on its own. Section 11c is open to any user but subject to rightsholder opt-out and covers only reproduction/extraction, not communication — this would be BLUE on its own. However, the pre-existing Section 12 (private copying) also remains in force, covering reproduction of full works for private use (LIGHT BLUE). Comparing: Section 11c (BLUE for TDM — reproduction by any user, all works, but no sharing) is actually more permissive than Section 12 (LIGHT BLUE — private use only). Section 11c covers reproduction and extraction for TDM purposes by any user, for all types of works, but does not cover communication/sharing. This yields BLUE. However, Section 11c is subject to rightsholder opt-out (Article 4 mechanism), which means it is not unconditionally available. The opt-out mechanism means that for works where rightsholders have reserved TDM rights, the exception does not apply. This is a significant limitation but under the classification rules, it does not change the color — it is analogous to a 'lawful access' requirement or proportionality qualifier. Therefore, Section 11c yields BLUE. Section 11b (no opt-out, but limited to research organisations) yields PURPLE. The most permissive exception is Section 11c at BLUE. Reassessing: Section 11c permits reproduction and extraction for TDM by any user, for any work, but does not permit sharing/communication. This is BLUE. This is more permissive than Section 12 (LIGHT BLUE, private use only). Classification changes to BLUE.
Exceptions considered
TDM for research organisations and cultural heritage institutions for scientific research. Reproduction and extraction permitted. No opt-out. Storage permitted for verification of research results.
General TDM exception: reproduction and extraction for text and data mining by any user, for lawfully accessible works. Subject to rightsholder opt-out. Does not cover communication/sharing.
Private copying for private use — unchanged. Excludes architecture, industrial art copies, computer programs in digital form, digital databases.
Institutional copying by libraries, archives, museums.
Quotation right.
English rendering
[Unofficial translation]: Section 11b. (1) Reproductions and extractions of lawfully accessible works for the purpose of text and data mining carried out by research organisations and cultural heritage institutions for the purposes of scientific research shall be permitted. (2) Copies made under subsection (1) shall be stored with an appropriate level of security and may be retained for the purposes of scientific research, including for the verification of research results. Section 11c. (1) Reproductions and extractions of lawfully accessible works for the purpose of text and data mining shall be permitted. (2) The provision of subsection (1) shall not apply where the rightholders have expressly reserved the right to text and data mining in an appropriate manner.
Source links
Lov nr. 639 af 4. juni 2024 om ændring af ophavsretsloven (Modernisation amendments including parody exception)
Relevant update · Effective 2024-07-01
80%
Relevant section: Section 22a (parody), Section 12 (unchanged)
Dates: Effective 2024-07-01 · Enacted 2024-06-04
Why this score
The June 2024 amendments modernised the Danish Copyright Act, including codification of the parody/caricature/pastiche exception (Section 22a) and various other changes. However, the research-relevant exceptions (Sections 11b, 11c, 12, 16) were not materially changed by this amendment. The parody exception is not directly research-relevant. The TDM exceptions (Sections 11b and 11c) and private copying (Section 12) remain in force as before. The most permissive research-relevant exception remains Section 11c (general TDM — reproduction/extraction by any user, subject to opt-out), yielding BLUE.
Exceptions considered
TDM for research organisations and cultural heritage institutions — unchanged.
General TDM exception: reproduction and extraction by any user, subject to rightsholder opt-out — unchanged.
Private copying for private use — unchanged.
Institutional copying by libraries, archives, museums — unchanged.
Quotation right — unchanged.
Parody, caricature, pastiche exception — new, but not directly research-relevant.
Source links
Ophavsretsloven (Danish Copyright Act, as amended through 2024)
Current law confirmation · Effective 2025-01-01
80%
Relevant section: Section 11b, Section 11c, Section 12, Section 16, Section 22
Dates: Effective 2025-01-01
Why this score
As of 2025, the Danish Copyright Act contains the following research-relevant exceptions: (1) Section 11b — TDM for research organisations and cultural heritage institutions for scientific research (no opt-out, but limited to specific institutional users = PURPLE); (2) Section 11c — General TDM exception for any user, covering reproduction and extraction, subject to rightsholder opt-out (covers all works, all users, but only reproduction/extraction, not communication = BLUE); (3) Section 12 — Private copying for private use by any person (single copies, excludes architecture, industrial art copies, digital computer programs, digital databases = LIGHT BLUE); (4) Section 16/16a/16b — Institutional copying by libraries, archives, museums (PURPLE); (5) Section 22 — Quotation (RED). The most permissive exception for research use is Section 11c (general TDM), which permits reproduction and extraction by any user for any lawfully accessible work, but does not cover communication/sharing. This yields BLUE. Denmark has no general fair dealing or fair use clause. The rightsholder opt-out under Section 11c and the non-commercial restriction under Section 11b are classification-neutral factors per the rules. The overall classification is BLUE.
Exceptions considered
TDM for research organisations and cultural heritage institutions for scientific research. Reproduction and extraction. No opt-out. Storage for verification permitted.
General TDM exception: reproduction and extraction for text and data mining by any user, for lawfully accessible works. Subject to rightsholder opt-out. Does not cover communication/sharing.
Private copying: any person may make single copies of a published work for private use. Excludes architecture, industrial art copies, computer programs in digital form, digital databases.
Institutional copying by libraries, archives, museums for preservation, collection purposes, and limited supply to users.
Quotation from published works in accordance with proper usage and to the extent required by the purpose.
English rendering
[Unofficial translation of key provisions]: Section 11b: Reproductions and extractions of lawfully accessible works for the purpose of text and data mining carried out by research organisations and cultural heritage institutions for the purposes of scientific research shall be permitted. Copies may be retained for verification of research results. Section 11c: Reproductions and extractions of lawfully accessible works for the purpose of text and data mining shall be permitted, unless the rightholders have expressly reserved the right in an appropriate manner. Section 12(1): When a work has been made public, any person may make single copies for his private use; such copies must not be used for any other purpose.