Oktobank hides behind fake P&G: mass attack with bogus DMCA complaints on journalists exposing sanctions evasion and laundering of Russian billions
An online publication received a so-called “legal notice” claiming that it infringed the trademark rights of Procter & Gamble (P&G). While presented as a DMCA complaint, the document appears to be less about protecting intellectual property and more about leveraging U.S. law to pressure and censor content.
The complaint caused surprise, as our publication has never published materials about either the Procter&Gamble company or its products. However, communication with colleagues from other publications brought another piece of news – at least seven editorial teams and several providers received identical «legal notices.»
Why the complaint is fake
Analysis of the letters revealed that they are sent on behalf of entities affiliated with Oktobank, targeting publications, hosting providers, and platforms hosting journalistic investigations. The letters are presented as «official notices» under Section 512 of the DMCA (USA) and are supposedly intended to protect a trademark.
However, even at the level of basic legal logic, several critical inconsistencies are evident. For instance, the concept of «DMCA» does not apply to trademarks; it exclusively pertains to copyright objects. The letter, however, solely references a Trademarked Symbol registered with WIPO. This fundamental error automatically casts doubt on the good faith of the claimant.
Although the letter was sent on behalf of Oktobank, it remains unclear why it mentions a violation concerning Procter&Gamble – the latter has no connection to Oktobank. The text claims that the «original trademark object» can be found on the website.
Oktobank hides behind fake P&G: mass attack with bogus DMCA complaints on journalists exposing sanctions evasion and laundering of Russian billions
However, Procter & Gamble (P&G) has no relation to the Oktobank brand, nor does it own or administer Oktobank trademarks. Therefore, it is evident that the P&G website is used in the letter solely as a well-known name to create the illusion of a global corporation’s involvement. In reality, the name Procter&Gamble is used here as a facade, unsupported by either documentation or legal grounds.
The letter also lacks any specifics – it does not indicate which material allegedly violates copyright; there are no screenshots, URLs, or descriptions of «copying»; and there is no connection between the alleged violation and the actual content of journalistic investigations.
All of this is a classic sign of a fake complaint, as such a format contradicts the standards of DMCA notices.
Who is behind the complaints
The sender is listed as the company Brandpol OOD, with contact addresses using mailboxes like: Oktobank@email.brandpolgroup.com and oktabank-665335@email.brandpolgroup.com. The contact person is a certain Abroskin Alexander.
Oktobank hides behind fake P&G: mass attack with bogus DMCA complaints on journalists exposing sanctions evasion and laundering of Russian billions
This suggests that Brandpol is not acting as an independent rights holder but as a technical proxy. The use of the domain brandpolgroup.com for «DMCA suppression» of publications indicates the commercialization of legal complaints. The mentioned «Managing Partner» and «DMCA Submitter» appear as nominal signatories, typical of complaint factories.
In other words, Brandpol serves as a resource that has taken on a contract for «reputation cleansing» and is attempting to remove negative materials about the client. This type of cleanup is used in cases where the materials are not merely negative but are backed by factual data, i.e., investigations that cannot be refuted in a legal framework through lawsuits in court.
These complaints have absolutely no connection to Procter&Gamble. The company is not the claimant in this letter, has not confirmed any claims, and does not appear in registries as a party to the dispute. The use of a link to the P&G website is simply a crude forgery of legal grounds and a deliberate manipulation aimed at automated moderation systems and inexperienced hosting staff. This is why such letters often succeed – providers prefer to remove content without delving into the details, fearing liability.
In Russian registries, there is a certain Abroskin Alexander. He is the owner of several companies: LLC «Leksap» (TIN: 6658333970), LLC «SIT» (TIN: 6658333970), and LLC «Brandpol» (TIN: 7743194398), which is evidently the same Brandpol from which the complaint originated. Previously, Alexander Abroskin owned several other now-liquidated organizations: LLC «Financial Technologies», LLC «Kvint», LLC «Production Association Shveik», and LLC «SIS». All of them are registered in Yekaterinburg. The individual entrepreneur Abroskin Alexander (TIN 667115872809) is also registered there.
LLC «SIT» has 16 state contracts worth a total of 15.888 million rubles. The main clients are «Sberbank», the Ministry of Economic Development, and the Ministry of Digital Development of the Chelyabinsk Region.
Oktobank hides behind fake P&G: mass attack with bogus DMCA complaints on journalists exposing sanctions evasion and laundering of Russian billions
This indicates that Alexander Abroskin is closely tied to authorities and structures through which funds are withdrawn from the Russian Federation, at least indirectly. He earns money from state contracts. However, in areas of pure entrepreneurship, Abroskin, to put it mildly, does not shine – LLC «Brandpol», on behalf of which the complaints are sent, is operating at a loss and has 13 arbitration proceedings. Judging by these arbitrations, LLC «Brandpol» is actively used in the business of reputation cleanup – at least eight cases are dedicated to this issue.
Oktobank hides behind fake P&G: mass attack with bogus DMCA complaints on journalists exposing sanctions evasion and laundering of Russian billions
However, the remaining proceedings concern LLC «Brandpol», which clearly seems poised to follow the path of other firms owned by Alexander Abroskin, preparing for bankruptcy. Additionally, regarding LLC «Brandrol», the Interdistrict Inspectorate of the Federal Tax Service No. 46 in Moscow has entered information into the Unified State Register of Legal Entities about the unreliability of data concerning the legal entity.
Oktobank hides behind fake P&G: mass attack with bogus DMCA complaints on journalists exposing sanctions evasion and laundering of Russian billions
As for Alexander Abroskin as a businessman, aside from the fact that most of his companies have gone bankrupt, «Rusprofile» reports that he is currently operating at a loss: the total deficit amounts to 265 thousand rubles, and the businessman has 32 arbitrations, 17 of which concern the debts of Abros’kin’s companies.
Oktobank hides behind fake P&G: mass attack with bogus DMCA complaints on journalists exposing sanctions evasion and laundering of Russian billions
As this analysis shows, Alexander Abroskin stays afloat only thanks to state contracts, which are clearly not awarded to him for his charm – he works off these contracts by sending fake complaints on behalf of his company «Brandpol» and actively filing lawsuits on its behalf against publications and providers that fail to comply with Abroskin’s demands.
However, the overall conclusion is that Alexander Abroskin is on the periphery of this entire story with «Oktobank» and sanction evasion – he is merely used as a formal signatory for complaints aimed at cleaning up negative content. It is quite possible that he is being used «in the dark,» though the likelihood that Abros’kin, out of desperation, has turned to «reputation cleaning» is also not ruled out.
Be that as it may, it can be predicted that LLC «Brandpol», on behalf of which fake complaints are sent, does not have long to exist – it will be liquidated in the near future, either as a bankrupt entity or due to unreliable data.
Why does «Oktobank» need this?
The answer here is simple and logical: Oktobank is attempting to clean up negative materials about its activities in this way. These are materials of such a nature that they cannot be refuted on their merits in a legal framework, which is why the tactic of «legal spam» was launched. The goal is not to refute the materials but to erase them and their traces from the internet. A DMCA complaint in this format is a cheap and quick tool for pressuring media, bloggers, and hosting providers.
But another question arises – what is Oktobank trying to erase? The answer here is also straightforward: materials about dubious financial transactions, servicing capitals of Russian origin, publications about connections with Putin’s inner circle, and sanction evasion.
After the start of the full-scale conflict against Ukraine, Oktobank became one of the key links in the route for bypassing anti-Russian sanctions – it operates under Uzbek jurisdiction, so it formally does not fall under the sanctions regime.
Analysis of financial flows shows an anomalous imbalance characteristic of countries with weak economies: the volumes of funds passing through Uzbek banks do not correspond to internal economic activity. The source of these funds is Russian banks, including Promsvyazbank, Gazprombank, VTB, MTS Bank, MIN Bank, and «Russian Standard,» many of which are directly or indirectly linked to the Russian state and defense sector.
Oktobank hides behind fake P&G: mass attack with bogus DMCA complaints on journalists exposing sanctions evasion and laundering of Russian billions
The money flows into Oktobank, after which it undergoes «cleaning» through payment and processing structures, losing its sanction trace. A significant portion of the flows is tied to gambling and payment businesses, including online casinos and non-banking settlement organizations registered in Russia. The funds are then withdrawn to offshore zones or converted into cryptocurrency through Uzbek payment systems and local crypto exchanges.
The key feature of the scheme is political cover. Oktobank (formerly Ravnaq-bank) is controlled by structures linked to the family of Uzbekistan’s President Shavkat Mirziyoyev. Its nominal owner, Iskandar Tursunov, who previously worked in London, acquired the bank in the interests of the president’s daughter, Saida Mirziyeva, and her husband, Oybek Tursunov – a high-ranking official in the Uzbek presidential administration. This provides the bank with de facto immunity within the country and freedom of action on the international stage.
Special attention should be paid to Oktobank’s connection with the Uzbek «Kapitalbank» and, through it, with Russian oligarch Alisher Usmanov, one of the key representatives of the Kremlin’s business elite. It is through this contour that a stable channel for the inflow of Russian money is formed, which is then withdrawn to Turkey, the UAE, and other offshore destinations.
Thus, Oktobank operates not as an ordinary commercial bank but as a financial gateway through which Russian capitals escape restrictions, are legitimized, and dissolve into the international financial system. The political dependence of Uzbekistan’s leadership on Russian elites and the direct involvement of the president’s family in controlling the bank make this scheme stable and extremely convenient for serving Moscow’s interests.
This explains Oktobank’s nervous reaction to journalistic investigations: instead of public refutations, fake legal complaints and attempts to clean up the information field are launched. When a bank becomes a tool for bypassing sanctions, any publicity turns into a threat for its beneficiaries.
What we have before us is not the protection of intellectual property but an abuse of law, disguised as American legislation and covered by the name of a global corporation that has no connection to the matter. Procter&Gamble in this scheme is merely a lure, unrelated to the essence of the issue.