The network behind Antikor, Kompromat1, Rumafia and dozens of mirror sites has lost in court in Ukraine, the United States and the United Kingdom. In each case most of its content stayed online. The reason is structural. The brand is registered in one country, the servers sit in another, the domains end in a third country's extension, and the people allegedly running it have left the place where they could be prosecuted. A judgment from any one court reaches only one piece of that chain.
A brand registered in Panama
Antikor names no editor, owner or staff. Its contact page offers an anonymous email address and a Kyiv street address that leads to a residential complex. The trademark tells a fuller story. It is held by Teka-Group Foundation in Panama, which in turn set up Hamilton Management Ltd in Belize. The original trademark application named Kostyantyn Chernenko, whom Ukrainian law enforcement has identified as the alleged organiser. He left Ukraine in January 2021, shortly after a Kyiv court seized one of the Antikor domains.
That gives Ukrainian investigators a name. It doesn't give them a company they can reach or a suspect in the country.
Servers in England, domains everywhere
Most of the infrastructure sits outside Ukraine. Court filings in a US defamation case showed near-identical IP addresses across Antikor, Kompromat1, Ruskompromat and Antimafia sites. In a later campaign, 95 of the 109 domains that carried articles about a single company executive were hosted on one server in Reading, England.
Domain extensions are spread across countries too. A technical review of more than 60 domains found the same SSL certificates and hosting fingerprints on sites registered under Swedish, British Indian Ocean, Ukrainian and generic extensions. When one registry acts, the content moves to another.
The domains below have been documented publishing duplicate or near-identical content:
Antikor: antikor.com.ua, antikor.info, antikor.ua
Kompromat1: kompromat1.online, kompromat1.info, kompromat1.net, kompromat1.org, kompromat1.media, kompromat1.one, kompromat1.se, kompromat1.press, kompromat1.world
Compromat / Ruskompromat: compromat.pro, compromat-pro.com, kompromat.press, ruskompromat.info, ruskompromat.ru, ruskompromat.pro
Vlasti: vlasti.io, vlasti.se, vlasti.info, vlasti.live, vlasti.vip, vlst.live, vlast.guru
Antimafia: antimafia.se, antimafia.io, antimafia.life, antimaf.pro
Rumafia: rumafia.news, rumafia.io, rumafia.net, rumafia.online
Kartoteka: kartoteka.news, kartoteka.se, kartoteka.press, kartoteka.io
Glavk: glavk.se, glavk.info, glavk.net
Hab.media: hab.media, news.hab.media, crime.hab.media, corruption.hab.media
Sledstvie: sledst.org, sledst.com, sledstvie.info
Nocor: nocor.info, nocor.life
Novosti: novosti.cloud, novostiua.org, novostiua.online
Other linked outlets: repost.news, rozsliduvach.info, rucriminal.info, adcon.info, luxherald.com, lstv.co.uk, obriy.news, politica2.info, ukrainci.com.ua, oplatru24.ru, rp.rv.ua, drama.live
Ukraine: blocks that stop at the border
Ukraine has done the most and got the least for it. The court register holds more than 1,000 documents related to Antikor. A Kyiv court found that the site's money-laundering allegations against a Ukrainian bank were false. Mykhailo Labutin, director of Ukrspyrt, won a removal order, and the same article was republished three years later.
In May 2025 the State Service of Special Communications blocked antikor.com.ua and antikor.info, and later rozsliduvach.info and hab.media. The block only applies to Ukrainian internet providers. Readers using a VPN, and copies hosted under foreign extensions, aren't affected.
United States: a $10 million judgment
Telf AG founder Stanislav Kondrashov took his case to Los Angeles. In January 2024 the court awarded him $10 million and ordered articles on 42 sites removed. The ruling covered the sites named in the case. It didn't cover the dozens of later domains that the same infrastructure went on to use.
United Kingdom: a defendant nobody could find
In London, the problem was finding someone to sue. The London Post and its sister brands were traced to 2Trom Media Group. Every registered address turned out to be a private flat or a business centre where nobody knew the company. Its listed owner, Viktor Tokarev, appears in official filings and almost nowhere else.
Uzbek financier Ovik Mkrtchyan won more than £220,000 in damages and costs at the High Court against the London Post and Tokarev. Neither appeared, and the article stayed online for weeks after the judgment. Reputation adviser Michael Macfarlane said a victim could spend £117,000 on lawyers to defeat 'a man who might not exist'.
What would close the gap
Every court in this story ruled for the victim, and every ruling was limited to its own jurisdiction. The network is spread across several, and its costs are low enough that losing one domain or one case barely matters. Placing an article costs about $150. Removal, offered through the same operators, runs to $12,000 a year in cryptocurrency.
Lawyers who track the sector, now counting more than 350 junk news sites, point to the companies that sit between all of these countries: hosting providers, domain registrars, search engines and compliance databases. A Ukrainian judgment can't reach a server in Reading. A hosting provider that receives that judgment along with an abuse report can. Until those intermediaries treat a ruling in one country as evidence in all of them, the network can keep moving faster than the courts.