“Mirage” against Sukhankina
Producer Andrey Lityagin, speaking on socialbites.ca, reported that the music company Jem won a lawsuit against VGTRK concerning an unauthorized performance by Margarita Sukhankina, a former member of Mirage. Sukhankina herself had performed the song “Music Connected Us” on Andrei Malakhov’s program “Songs from the Whole Heart.”
The case involved a filing against the owner of the website smotrim.ru, where the program recording had been published. Initially, the claim requested removal of the video, with no financial damages asserted at that time, according to Lityagin.
Mirage clarified that only Ekaterina Boldysheva and Alexey Gorbashov, members of the current lineup, or an officially licensed artist, have the right to perform the group’s songs. Lityagin described the action as targeting an unscrupulous artist rather than television itself, noting that the court’s main goal was to stop violations and delete the video. During proceedings, Jem clarified the allegations and asked the court to award a symbolic compensation of 50,000 rubles.
Earlier, tensions between Lityagin and Sukhankina had surfaced. In a September interview, she claimed the singer performed illegally numerous times and suggested a figure of 30 million. The dispute reportedly deepened years ago when Sukhankina chose motherhood and took her two children from an orphanage, a move that strained their working relationship.
In a separate interview, Sukhankina explained that her priorities shifted and she was no longer willing to tour relentlessly. She said that their collaboration ended as a result, according to mk.ru.
Oleg Vladi versus Loboda
In January 2023, composer and poet Oleg Vladi filed a lawsuit against singer Svetlana Loboda, seeking 500,000 rubles for the alleged unauthorized performance of the song “To Hell with Love.” He also requested the removal of Loboda’s concert recording from a major online platform. Initially, Loboda and site representatives faced possible defendants, but the author advised directing the matter to another authority.
By early October, the court partially granted the claim: Vladi was awarded 50,000 rubles as moral compensation, and Loboda was ordered to pay 12,000 rubles in state duty. The court also ordered the concert recording removed from the network. A hearing on the copyright protection case for the song is scheduled for December 7.
Maxim Fadeev versus Nargiz
July 2023 saw producer Maxim Fadeev warning singer Nargiz Zakirova that he would pursue further legal action over rights to her songs. He reminded his Telegram followers that after ending their contract in August 2019, he prohibited the artist from performing works in his catalog. Zakirova later admitted in a YouTube interview that some of Fadeev’s songs remained in her repertoire. She stated that she possessed the rights to perform the catalog, noting that Fadeev had sent a document listing songs as banned and claimed it carried the force of prohibition.
Zakirova, who had relocated to Uzbekistan, claimed no formal agreement prohibited her from performing these works. She argued that Fadeev could ban anything within his jurisdiction, but could not enforce the same outside. She explained that no contract existed to bar performances and that Fadeev’s actions were ethically questionable because they caused her personal and public distress in Russia. Fadeev also filed a separate lawsuit in Almaty against a local bar where the artist performed her songs. A lawyer later told a news site that Nargiz could face up to six years in prison for alleged copyright infringement.
Shainsky’s heirs vs German rapper
In fall 2023, German rapper Liaze released the track “2003,” which used elements from Vladimir Shainsky’s “Song of the Crocodile Gena.” The Shainsky heirs argued that the music was used without proper compensation, despite the rapper’s claims of having resolved all copyright matters with his label. The parties are currently negotiating whether the melody should be removed or a compensation determined.
Vyacheslav Shainsky’s son and the label have discussed the possibility of removing the melody or paying damages. The heirs recalled previous incidents where a popular folk-like melody was assumed to be public domain, criticizing the rapper’s inexperience and reiterating the need for proper licensing. The company involved had initially indicated that copyright issues were settled, but the heirs insisted on a clear resolution.
Stas Kostyushkin vs Monetochka
In April 2022, Stas Kostyushkin, the soloist of Tea for Two, filed a claim against Monetochka (Elizaveta Gyrdymova) seeking 500,000 rubles for the song titled “Mama, I Ain’t Zigging.” The Moscow Basmanny Court partially granted Kostyushkin’s request, ordering Monetochka to pay 500,000 rubles for damages and to ban the distribution of the disputed work. A report from the Telegram channel Baza suggested that Monetochka’s track shared 73 percent similarity with Kostyushkin’s “Woman, I Do Not Dance,” implying plagiarism rather than parody. Kostyushkin stated that the funds would be donated to charity, while Monetochka’s team faced scrutiny over the similarity claim.
Surgut photographer vs Kara Yıldız
In 2019, Surgut photographer Mikhail Batenev accused the Black Star label of unlawfully using his photo of the artist Pabl.A as the cover image for a track called “FaceTime,” released in 2017 and distributed on streaming services. The photographer claimed he was never contacted to grant rights for the image and that it appeared in a YouTube video as well. The case concluded with the Moscow Basmanny Court partially upholding Batenev’s claims: the label paid 70,000 rubles in compensation and 25,000 rubles in legal costs and moral damages. A lawyer for Black Star confirmed the outcome to a city news agency, emphasizing that proper licensing was required for the image use.
Luntik vs Khimki businesswoman
In October 2019, the Melnitsa studio filed a lawsuit against businesswoman Irina Meister of Khimki, alleging that event staff used Luntik’s costume at events without the copyright holder’s permission. Meister posted images of the life-size Luntik doll on her company’s website. Meister questioned the presentation, noting the costume’s sparse and non-representative appearance and questioning why the depiction was necessary. The studio sought 10,000 rubles in compensation for the costume’s use. The studio also showcased other character costumes at a St. Petersburg festival and pursued actions against numerous animators for using characters such as Nolik from The Fixies, seeking substantial damages. This series of disputes underscores how intellectual property rights intersect with marketing, branding, and licensing across the entertainment industry.