HBO Trademarks Frozen in Ukraine After Lyudmila Ignatenko Legal Dispute
A Ukrainian court has placed a lien on HBO’s trademarks registered in the country following the company’s failure to pay compensation to Lyudmila Ignatenko. The dispute centers on the unauthorized use of her identity in the acclaimed miniseries 'Chernobyl.' In November 2025, the Supreme Court of Ukraine upheld a ruling that HBO had violated Ignatenko’s rights and ordered the broadcaster to pay 500,000 hryvnia in moral damages. After the company did not comply by April 2025, private enforcement officer Andriy Avtorhov imposed the asset freeze on HBO’s local trademarks. If the debt remains unpaid, these trademarks could be put up for public auction.
The Case of Lyudmila Ignatenko and Her Story Used Without Consent
The legal action revolves around the use of Lyudmila Ignatenko’s personal story—and that of her late husband, Vasily Ignatenko, a Chernobyl disaster liquidator—in HBO’s 'Chernobyl' series without her permission. Ignatenko first filed her lawsuit against Home Box Office (HBO) in April 2020. The Civil Cassation Court within Ukraine’s Supreme Court later ruled that the series infringed on her right to control the use of her name and her husband’s name.
The Supreme Court increased the moral damages award to 500,000 hryvnia. However, HBO has yet to satisfy the judgment, triggering the trademark seizure in Ukraine. According to the law firm Mamunya IP, which represents Ignatenko, the trademarks could be sold off if the compensation remains unpaid.
“Anyone interested will be able to participate in the auction. Perhaps among your acquaintances there are those who would like to acquire the rights to HBO trademarks in Ukraine, thereby helping to enforce the court decision in favor of Lyudmila Ignatenko?” — representatives of Mamunya IP firm
This case has set a significant legal precedent regarding personal rights and the unauthorized use of individuals’ names and life stories in media productions. It highlights the growing need for strict adherence to legal and ethical standards in the creative industry, a matter that could influence future court rulings in similar disputes. The outcome also underscores the importance of discussions around fair compensation for people whose personal narratives are exploited without consent in cultural works.