Ivan Marchuk, Iconic Ukrainian Artist, Claims He Was Deceived and Now Fights for Rights to His Life's Work

In Ukraine, nearing his ninth decade, Ivan Marchuk, a painter regarded as one of the most significant contemporary artists, finds himself in an unexpected role: a plaintiff fighting to retain full creative rights to his vast artistic legacy.

Last year, Marchuk took legal action after claiming he was deceived into signing an agreement that transferred rights to his works for 100 years to three other individuals, all for a mere 10,000 hryvnias (approximately $228).

The court proceedings are still ongoing. "He does not lose hope for a fair resolution to this matter. He is grateful to all the good people who genuinely support him, both privately and publicly," said Tamara Strypko, Marchuk's longtime assistant, in a comment to the Kyiv Independent.

"At the same time, the situation is absolutely abnormal: a world-renowned artist is forced to prove that the copyright to over 5,000 works created over 80 years of his creative life belongs to him, not to a group of fraudsters," she added.

According to Marchuk, in 2020, he was approached by former Ukrainian deputy Mykhailo Apostol, who asked him to sign a document described as a non-binding letter of intent regarding the licensing of certain reproductions of his works. Apostol assured him that the document would have no legal force without notarization.

At the time of signing, Marchuk was suffering from poor vision following surgery and, as he stated, trusted the word of an acquaintance with whom he had communicated.

However, after Strypko, who was present during the signing, carefully reviewed the documents, Marchuk noted that they realized the agreement was an entirely different document.

Reportedly, Marchuk contacted Apostol and insisted that the former deputy cease any further actions, emphasizing that he had no desire to transfer rights to his works to anyone. Apostol, according to Marchuk, responded by assuring him that the matter was resolved.

"I was convinced that this disgraceful story ended the same day it began. But that did not happen. Four years passed, and Tamara Strypko received a call from her partners in winemaking, with whom I had officially entered into an agreement to use several images of my works on the labels of their products," Marchuk detailed in a Facebook post in March.

"They informed her that a man, whom they did not know, at one of the establishments where they presented their products, introduced himself as the owner of the exclusive copyright to images of my paintings. This man turned out to be Mykhailo Apostol."

Marchuk informed the Kyiv Independent that the document even contained a clause related to his original works.

This clause "obligated me to 'provide access to the original copies of any work... for proper exercise' of their rights 'within a reasonable time necessary for this,' which they defined as 'no more than one calendar month from the first request.' Can you imagine what could happen to a work (or works) of art outside the artist's studio for a month?" he said.

"I have always sought—and still seek—to exhibit my works, giving people the opportunity to enjoy art rather than profiting from its sale."

After the episode with the winemakers, Marchuk made several attempts to contact Apostol, all of which proved fruitless.

Apostol dismissed the accusations as soon as the dispute entered the public domain.

As part of Apostol's efforts to deflect growing public criticism, he launched a campaign to undermine Strypko's reputation, claiming that she herself managed all financial matters related to the sale of copies and reproductions, as well as agreements with winemakers and exhibitions related to Marchuk's works.

"These amounts total tens of millions of hryvnias. I am sure that no taxes are being paid and no oversight is taking place," he claimed. The post included an AI-generated image of a woman resembling Strypko carrying money and legal documents in an art studio.

Apostol did not respond to the Kyiv Independent's request for comment.

Amid the ongoing legal dispute, Marchuk countered those who claim that he and Strypko lack an understanding of creative licensing, noting that with his permission, Ukrposhta, the national postal service of Ukraine, issued stamps and envelopes, and the National Bank of Ukraine released coins based on his art.

However, neither creative licensing nor commercial profit has ever been a priority for the artist.

"I have always sought—and still seek—to exhibit my works, giving people the opportunity to enjoy art rather than profiting from its sale," Marchuk emphasized in a comment to the Kyiv Independent.

"Today, when many art institutions around the world offer to organize my exhibitions, my first condition and stipulation is that it must be a presentation project, not a commercial one—I have no intention of selling paintings. That is why I always choose state or municipal museums and galleries rather than commercial establishments."

Marchuk accused Apostol and his associates of subjecting him to "pressure, humiliation, and threats" throughout the legal battle.