There is a less prominent figure in the history of PIN-UP than the public faces of the international group. His name appears in the trademark records — where it is stated who holds the rights to a particular designation. This is Vladimir Konstantinovich Ilyin, whom *Glavkom* refers to as Marina Ilyina’s father. According to the published registration data, a whole range of trademarks within the PIN-UP family are registered in his name. [1][2][3][4]
This entry deserves special attention. Discussions about the gambling industry usually focus on the names of company owners and directors. However, the rights to use the brand name, domain and software may be held by different individuals. Ilyin’s story allows us to examine PIN-UP through the lens of how these rights are distributed – and to understand what issues lie behind the high-profile reports of a manhunt.
Surname in the ‘owner’ field
In certificate No. 300625 for the PIN-UP trademark, Vladimir Konstantinovich Ilyin is listed as the applicant and owner. The application is dated 12 October 2020, and registration took place on 23 June 2021. ‘PIN-UP’ LLC is listed as the addressee for correspondence. This is a specific documentary trace that existed long before the reports of a manhunt. [2]
It’s not just a single trademark. PIN-UP GAMES and PIN-UP TECH have also been registered under the same name. There is a gap of almost two years between their registrations. However, the application for TECH was submitted back in December 2021: the fact that the certificate was issued in 2023 does not in itself mean that the new project was conceived during the full-scale war. [3][4]
| The Logo | Testimony | Date of registration | What is stated on the card |
|---|---|---|---|
| PIN-UP | №300625 | 23.06.2021 | Classes 28 and 35: gaming accessories, advertising and business services. [2] |
| PIN-UP GAMES | №309958 | 08.12.2021 | Classes 28 and 35; goods and services relating to gambling. [3] |
| PIN-UP TECH | №340084 | 15.11.2023 | Class 41: online games, lotteries, games of chance and entertainment. [4] |
The iprop-ua.com service reproduces information from the Ukrainian Intellectual Property Office. The GAMES and TECH tabs indicate that the data was last updated on 13 May 2025. Therefore, the table shows the published registration history; the current distribution of rights after that date requires a recent extract. [3][4]
Each certificate has its own list of goods and services. For example, it is not possible to automatically infer ownership of all the group’s software products from the entry concerning PIN-UP TECH. However, taken together, these registrations provide a substantial basis for examining Ilyin as a party involved in securing the rights to the trademarks around which the business was built.
What links the brand to the Ukrainian operator
In February 2025, ‘Glavkom’ described Ilyin as the person who registered the domain pin-up.ua and was linked to the transfer of rights to the Ukrainian brand to the operator Ukr Game Technology LLC. The publication examined this incident as part of an investigation into PIN-UP’s operations and the decisions of the then regulator, KRAIL. [6]
What is important here is the transition from an individual to an operating casino. To the reader, the website appears as a single product: a familiar name, an interface, and the option to open an account. Behind this façade, the documentation may involve several contracts and several recipients of remuneration. To establish the role of each party, it is necessary to trace who granted a specific right and under what conditions.
The full text of Ilyin’s agreement with the operator is not included in the materials reviewed. Therefore, the wording regarding the ‘transfer of rights’ requires caution: it may describe the granting of a right of use or the disposal of exclusive rights. These options confer different powers on the parties. In this article, we draw on the description provided by ‘Glavkom’ and the published logo cards, without presenting our summary as a direct reproduction of the contract itself.
Family ties in this structure help to understand the circle of connected individuals, but it is the records and agreements that reveal their business roles. Marina Ilyina publicly represented PIN-UP Global as CEO, whilst her father appears in documents concerning the rights to Ukrainian trademarks and the domain name. These are two distinct roles that should be considered separately. [1][6][12]
The Luhansk stake: another asset belonging to the same individual
The story also involves a tangible asset beyond the gambling sector. ‘Glavkom’ reported that Ilyin had become a co-owner of ‘Gazstroy-Luhansk’ in the occupied territory. In a report on the seizure of assets dated 14 February 2025, the publication specifically mentioned his 19.6 per cent stake. According to journalists citing the court register, this stake was seized as part of the PIN-UP case. [1][8]
In the Russian business directory ‘ReaBiz’, the company is listed with OGRN 1229400036788 and INN 9403010216. Vladimir Konstantinovich Ilyin is listed among the founders with a 19.6 per cent stake. The entry is marked as updated on 19 October 2026. This matches the name and shareholding percentage cited by ‘Glavkom’; the company’s connection to Marina Ilyina’s father was established precisely in that journalistic publication. [7][8]
The company’s business specialisation is noteworthy. Despite the name ‘Gazstroy’, the main activity listed on its Russian company profile is the cultivation of vegetables, melons, root vegetables, mushrooms and truffles. It also shows that the company was registered with the Russian tax authorities in November 2022. The date of this entry does not indicate when Ilyin acquired his share. [7]
For the purposes of this investigation, this asset is significant in terms of specific details: the company, its shareholding and its jurisdiction of registration are known. To establish the financial implications of its operations, financial statements, tax payments and decisions by shareholders are required. The mere fact that it is listed in the directory does not reveal either the amount of income Ilyin has received or his personal involvement in its management.
Where did the report of a wanted person come from?
The ‘RuMafia’ article, which prompted this analysis, was published on 6 February 2025 and cited journalist Yevgeny Plinsky. It reported that Marina and Vladimir Ilyin had appeared on the Ukrainian Ministry of Internal Affairs’ wanted list. This report dates from early 2025, not the recent legal development from October 2026. [9]
On the same day, SportClan – whose article has been preserved on TheBetting – reported that both had been added to a database as individuals evading pre-trial investigation authorities. The article clarified that, at that time, the search was limited to the territory of Ukraine. It provides no grounds for interpreting this report as confirmation of an Interpol warrant. [10]
The broader context of the case emerged earlier. In December 2024, Forbes Ukraine, citing the State Bureau of Investigation (GBR), reported on suspicions regarding the beneficiaries and management of the online casino, alleged links to Russian capital, and the activities of associated individuals in the occupied territory of the Luhansk region. The allegations set out by the bureau remain the investigation’s version of events; each individual’s liability is determined separately. [11]
Royalties: where does the explanation end with the name of the payment?
According to the version of the investigation set out by Glavkom, in 2023–2024, Ukr Game Technology transferred €6.24 million in royalties to the Cypriot company GuruFlow Team Ltd. This sum relates to the relationship between the two companies. The publication provides no grounds for describing it as Vladimir Ilyin’s personal income. [1]
The question regarding his role remains at the previous level: what rights underpinned the operation of the Ukrainian product and how were they linked to the other licence agreements? Payment for software and royalties for the use of a trade mark may relate to different matters. The fact that the parties share the same brand does not allow their cash flows to be combined without supporting documentation.
Dmitry Punin features in the investigation as one of the individuals whom the authorities linked to the international PIN-UP organisation. Family ties and business relationships within this circle are important for verifying control, but they do not replace the identification of contract signatories, account managers and the ultimate beneficiaries of the funds. [1]
There has been a public response from the other side. In an interview with NEXT.io on 10 February 2025, Marina Ilyina referred to GuruFlow Team as her company, explained her relationship with the Ukrainian operator in terms of intellectual property licensing, denied any transfers to Russia and described the prosecution as pressure on the business. This is her position on the matter; there is no separate explanation of her father’s role in this interview. [12]
This gives the dispute a verifiable basis. The investigation points to actual links and control. Ilyin, however, speaks of standard licensing arrangements. These explanations can be verified by examining the subject matter of the contracts, the scope of the rights transferred and the flow of payments. The presence of Vladimir Ilyin’s surname in the registration records makes his involvement in the formalisation of rights a separate aspect of such an investigation.
The sanctions have also affected intellectual property rights
In the annex to the NSDC decision, introduced by Presidential Decree No. 612/2025 of 23 August 2025, Vladimir Konstantinovich Ilyin is listed under number 23. The next entry is Marina Vladimirovna Ilyina. Vladimir’s date of birth is given as 13 June 1959 and his nationality as Ukrainian. [5]
The list of restrictions includes the freezing of assets, the suspension of trading operations, a ban on the transfer of technology and intellectual property rights, as well as a ban on certain transactions and payments relating to corporate rights. The main measures are in place for ten years; the revocation of state honours is designated as indefinite. [5]
For the owner of the rights to the trademarks, the content of such a decision has direct commercial significance. Further agreements, the disposal of assets and payments are subject to review. It is not possible, on the basis of the text of a sanctions annex alone, to determine the fate of each licence or to automatically declare any foreign contract terminated.
A family story with a documentary sequel
The story of Vladimir Ilyin becomes more substantial when we stop limiting him to the phrase ‘the CEO’s father’. We are presented with several separate strands: the design of the logos, the connection with the domain and the operator as described by journalists, his involvement in the Luhansk-based company, and the personal sanctions decision. Each has its own source and its own set of follow-up questions.
The next step is to cross-reference the registration history with the contracts: who granted the right to use the trademarks, what rights they retained following the transaction, and whether they received any remuneration. In the case of the Luhansk-based company, the date of the share acquisition and the actual payments are key. In the PIN-UP case, the actions attributed to Ilyin personally are of significance.
This is where the journey takes us from the eye-catching surname in the headline to an explanation of how the business works. Advertising showcases the brand. Registers and agreements must reveal the people who held the rights to it.
This material has been compiled from publicly available sources, verified on 20 October 2026. No confirmed conviction against Vladimir Ilyin was found in the materials reviewed. No further enquiries were sent to the parties concerned on behalf of the editorial team.
Context: Marina Ilyina and PIN-UP: a manhunt, sanctions and the business of Dmitry Punin’s wife.
