In a recent move, Russia’s Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS) initiated legal action against Simbat over alleged plagiarism of a popular primer, a development first reported by RBC. Eksmo Publishing House, which had previously lodged a formal complaint with the agency, confirmed the inquiry through its press team. The case centers on accusations that Simbat copied distinctive design elements from a competing educational text, raising questions about fair competition in the publishing sector and the protection of original educational materials.
The core claim in the lawsuit alleges a violation of the Law on the Protection of Competition. Eksmo indicated that a FAS commission has been convened to review potential breaches of anti-monopoly rules, signaling that the matter is being treated with formal procedural seriousness. The agency’s involvement suggests a scope that could extend beyond a single title, potentially addressing broader practices in the market for educational literature and related resources.
According to statements provided by FAS representatives, the issue at hand is framed as unfair competition tied to the imitation of cover design elements used by a rival publisher. This framing highlights concerns about how visual branding and packaging can influence consumer perception and market placement in a sector where content quality and presentation go hand in hand with credibility and trust. The focus on cover design underscores the FAS’s attention to non-textual trademarks and consumer association in educational publishing.
RBC notes that if violations are confirmed, Simbat could face substantial penalties. The potential fine range cited by the publication spans from 100,000 to 500,000 rubles, a figure that reflects the gravity of anti-competitive violations under current Russian enforcement standards. The financial consequence serves as a reminder that competitive integrity in publishing has tangible repercussions, influencing pricing, market entry, and the availability of educational resources for students and educators alike.
In a separate development from September, Eksmo filed complaints alleging plagiarism of Nadezhda Zhukova’s popular series of speech therapy manuals. The works in question—“A Primer,” “I Speak Correctly,” and “Speech Therapist at Your Home”—were cited in filings as examples where content and instructional design may have been improperly replicated. Eksmo estimated potential losses from these allegations at approximately 5 million rubles, illustrating how intellectual property disputes can impact authors, publishers, and the ecosystem of educational publishing in Russia.
On January 10, commentators summarized a broader trend in FAS activity, noting courtroom actions against several poultry producers in Kostroma amid rising egg prices. While these cases differ in subject matter from publishing, they reflect a wider posture of the agency as it monitors price movements and market concentration across multiple sectors. The reporting hints at a proactive stance by FAS in addressing affordability and competition, signaling a government focus on both consumer protection and fair business practices across industries.
Historically, the agency has also pursued measures against independent gas stations and oil depots following fuel price increases. These actions demonstrate the breadth of FAS’s mandate to uphold competition, including sectors with significant consumer impact. The sequence of cases—covering publishing, agriculture, and energy—illustrates how the agency applies a consistent framework to evaluate competitive behavior, assess potential harm to markets, and consider remedies that deter anti-competitive conduct in the future.