Why is the Bulgarian company Brandpol sending complaints against investigations into Octobank in the name of Procter & Gamble, and who is behind it?

LIn January 2026, a number of editorial teams, hosting companies, and online platforms were sent unusual legal notices. On the surface, these appeared to be routine DMCA takedown requests claiming infringement of Procter & Gamble’s intellectual property rights.

In reality, they demanded the removal of an investigation into the Uzbekistani Octobank, Russian capital, and sanctions evasion schemes. The very first paragraph of these letters is especially noteworthy. Neither Procter & Gamble nor its brands have any connection whatsoever to Octobank.

The complaints were sent by the Bulgarian company Brandpol OOD. The contact details listed the email addresses Oktobank@email.brandpolgroup.com and oktabank-665335@email.brandpolgroup.com, as well as a person named Aleksandr Abroskin (Abroskin Alexander Mikhailovich).

According to several publications, editorial offices received identical legal notices formatted as DMCA demands. The letters claimed that the investigations violated Procter & Gamble trademark rights.

The problem is that the DMCA does not regulate trademarks at all. The DMCA is an American mechanism for protecting copyright — music, videos, images, and texts — but not trademark disputes. This is exactly what even the recipients of the complaints pointed out: the document appeared legally incompetent and contradictory.

The letters contained no specific URLs, did not identify which exact content allegedly violated rights, provided no description of copied material, and did not explain any connection between the investigations and P&G. Instead of evidence, the notices referred to the Procter & Gamble brand as a “global authority.” In practice, the P&G name was used as legal decoration — so that automated moderation systems and frightened hosting providers would remove the materials more quickly.

What they demanded to remove

The materials targeted for removal had absolutely nothing to do with Procter & Gamble. Nearly all of the publications connected the attack to investigations surrounding the Uzbekistani Octobank (formerly Ravnaq Bank).

In those materials, Octobank appeared as a structure through which operations linked to sanctions evasion, Russian money, post-2022 payment routes, capital transfers through Uzbekistan, and parallel imports allegedly passed. Some publications directly described the bank as “infrastructure for sanctions evasion.” Others linked it to servicing Uzbekistani elites and major post-Soviet capital.

What connection these publications supposedly had to Procter & Gamble was not explained in a single word. In reality, such explanations were never required, because these demands were nothing more than an attempt at technical cleanup of search engine results and pressure on hosting infrastructure. Instead of Procter & Gamble, any other globally known name could have been used — from Coca-Cola to Boeing.

Brandpol OOD — who are they?

Naturally, such a brazen attempt at pressure sparked interest in the sender of the complaints — Brandpol OOD. At first glance, it appears to be an ordinary Bulgarian company from Varna. Registration details: EIK 201261446; address: Varna, Preslav 36, office 7; legal form: OOD (Bulgarian equivalent of an LLC).

According to registration records, the owners are Aleksandr Mikhailovich Abroskin — 70%, and Aleksey Aleksandrovich Katkov — 30%, both citizens of the Russian Federation.

The company positions itself as a brand protection, anti-counterfeit, and IP enforcement service. Its website lists services such as marketplace monitoring, takedown services, anti-counterfeiting measures, removal of unwanted content, anti-phishing operations, and similar activities. The company’s offices are located in Bulgaria, as well as in Russia, Canada, the United States, and Israel.

Its charter capital is symbolic — just 102 euros. At the same time, Brandpol claims to operate globally: according to LinkedIn, the company says it works in 170 countries and is integrated with thousands of marketplaces.

There are several other curious details. First, according to Bulgarian registration records, the company previously operated under a different name and was renamed relatively recently: in 2010, the company was registered under the name “Pimpos,” and on July 25, 2022, the name was changed.

The same day also marked the beginning of a series of ownership changes, and eventually, in August 2023, the company received its current owners and changed its legal form.

Second, one of the Bulgarian company’s offices is located in Yekaterinburg. This city is frequently mentioned in investigations into Octobank as one of the centers from which large sums of money are allegedly transferred to the bank.

Third, the company was originally also owned by Russians — Aleksey Shevelilov and Yuliya Tikhomirova. Who they are, where they disappeared to, and whether they have any connection to the current activities of Brandpol OOD remains unknown.

Fourth, Aleksandr Abroskin, who owns 70% of the company, is the sole owner of the firm “B2C.BG EOOD,” registered in the same city of Varna in 2023, and is also the head and founder of the organization “Sporten Klub Golden Panthers,” registered in Varna in 2022 as well.

No traces of actual activity by the company “B2C.BG” could be found. The sports club, however, is far more interesting. It reportedly “specializes in training cheerleaders, with a particular focus on developing young athletes from an early age.”

The club’s Instagram showcases impressive dance performances by very young girls. All of this may be entirely innocent in nature, but given Aleksandr Abroskin’s rather unusual activities related to cleaning up Octobank’s reputation, certain questions inevitably arise. At the same time, there is no evidence that the cheerleaders are involved in anything other than sports dancing.

Aleksandr Abroskin and Russia

There is another interesting trail. It leads to Russia. Yekaterinburg has already been mentioned in connection with Octobank. But Aleksandr Abroskin also appears in Russian registries as the owner — former or current — of several companies.

Aleksandr Mikhailovich Abroskin owns the Russian companies Lexap LLC, SIT LLC, and Brandpol LLC. In the past, he also owned several other organizations that have since been liquidated: Financial Technologies LLC, Kvint LLC, Production Association Shveyk LLC, and SIS LLC. All of them were registered in Yekaterinburg.

Aleksandr Mikhailovich Abroskin is also registered there as an individual entrepreneur.

The Russian company Brandpol LLC is also registered in Yekaterinburg, where the Bulgarian Brandpol OOD maintains an office as well. In both companies, the co-owner and director is Aleksandr Mikhailovich Abroskin. Is this merely a coincidence?

There is another interesting detail. According to Rusprofile, Aleksandr Abroskin is operating at a loss: his total negative balance amounts to 265,000 rubles, and the businessman has been involved in 32 arbitration cases, 17 of which specifically concern the debts of Abroskin’s companies.

Only one of Aleksandr Abroskin’s companies — SIT LLC — appears to generate money for him. The company holds 16 state contracts worth a total of 15.888 million rubles. Its main clients are Sberbank, the Ministry of Economic Development, and the Ministry of Digital Development of the Chelyabinsk region.

Why would the state-owned Sberbank and government agencies so generously finance an obvious bankrupt? What is especially interesting is that Abroskin is being paid for the “maintenance and development of information websites.”

As a result, the following picture emerges. Websites publishing investigations into Octobank receive letters demanding removal of these materials from the Bulgarian company Brandpol, signed by Aleksandr Abroskin. The same Abroskin is also the owner of a Russian company with the identical name. The same Abroskin is tied to Russian state contracts for the “development of information websites.” Russia and its state banks also appear in investigations concerning sanctions evasion through Octobank.

The only remaining question is who Aleksandr Mikhailovich Abroskin really is: merely a nominee on whom several companies are registered, or someone playing a far more significant role in this entire story.