After a patriotic surge from Belarusians in the Philharmonic, composer Movchan's widow forbade everyone from performing Yanka Kupala's "Prayer"

On January 12, an evening celebration dedicated to the 85th birthday of Vladimir Mulyavin, the founder of "Pesnyary", took place at the Belarusian State Philharmonic. Marina Mulyavina, his daughter, served as the general producer of the program dedicated to Mulyavin's jubilee.

Fragments from "Pesnyary" programs were performed by the National Academic Folk Orchestra named after Zhinovich and singer Petr Elfimov.

At the climactic moment, when "Prayer" to the words of Yanka Kupala resounded from the stage, the hall rose in a single surge.

However, not everyone shared the patriotic surge of the Belarusians. Singer Iryna Vidava, the widow of Oleg Movchan, the composer of the music for Pesnyary's "Prayer", spoke out against it.

On January 15, the day the news about the incident appeared on "Nasha Niva", Vidava published a categorical statement on her husband's personal website banning the performance of Movchan's creative legacy.

Petr Elfimov at the concert dedicated to Vladimir Mulyavin's 85th birthday. Photo: BelTA

She accused Elfimov of "years of disrespect" for copyright and forbade him from performing Movchan's music in any form.

Moreover, Vidava took care to ensure that already uploaded video recordings from the concert at the Philharmonic disappeared from the network — she filed copyright infringement complaints on YouTube, which led to the blocking of some videos.

The conflict indeed has a long history. In 2011, Oleg Movchan personally forbade Elfimov from performing "Prayer" after he sang it at a festival in Maladzyechna "without prior agreement and without indicating authorship". A similar story also happened with the song "Stasya".

Павялічыць

However, this principled stance has an interesting peculiarity: it works selectively. Exactly a year ago, in January 2025, Petr Elfimov already performed "Prayer" before thousands of spectators at "Minsk-Arena" at the final concert of the propagandistic "Unity Marathon". At that time, the composer's widow did not make any claims, perhaps out of fear, as Kolya Lukashenka accompanied Elfimov on the piano.

"I forbid in any form". What made it onto the blacklist

In her statement, Iryna Vidava emphasizes that, since Vladimir Mulyavin's heirs refused to conclude a joint agreement with her for rights management, she disposes of her husband's share personally.

And her decision is unambiguous — a ban on the performance of songs to which she holds proprietary rights, not only by Petr Elfimov but also by any other performer without Vidava's written consent.

The list of banned works includes:

"Prayer";
"Red Rose";
"Lyavonikha";
"Slutsk Weavers";
"Honor to You, Maria";
As well as pop hits: "Stasya", "Kuma", "Christ is Risen" and others.

Vidava went even further, banning even "secondary use" — meaning the broadcast of recordings of Elfimov's performances on television and radio.

"Leather S&M outfits" and the war over "Prayer"

Petr Elfimov is not the only Belarusian musician who suffered for performing "Prayer".

In July 2009, music critic Siarhei Budkin published a scathing review of Iryna Vidava's solo album "IV", which was produced by Oleg Movchan, on the pages of "Nasha Niva".

Павялічыць

The journalist called the work a "pale photocopy of secondary Russian pop" and a "provincial circus." He particularly scathingly criticized the singer's image, mentioning the photo on the cover "in leather S&M outfits," and expressed surprise that the author of the great "Prayer" was wasting his talent on such material.

Several years later, in 2014, the Movchan family had a reason to avenge the insult. Oleg Movchan sued Nastya Shpakovskaya, the leader of the rock band Naka. The reason was the performance of "Prayer" in the "Re:Pesnyary" project, which was organized by the same Siarhei Budkin.

At that time, Vidava supported her claims, partly with the position of Mulyavin's family: his widow Svetlana Mulyavina-Penkina and children Maryna, Olga, and Valery. Now, in 2026, Mulyavin's family found themselves on the other side of the barricades.

The court then set a precedent. Shpakovskaya tried to argue that "Prayer" is a spiritual anthem, created in a state ensemble under Mulyavin's leadership, and that it should not be the private property of one person.

"It became a spiritual anthem because Mulyavin sang it, our bard, not because Movchan wrote or sang it. And now we will all depend on a person who decides how much to pay," the singer said then.

However, Oleg Movchan took a firm stance: music is his property, and "arbitrary" arrangements spoil the work. He demanded compensation of about $1000, which was several times higher than usual rates. The court sided with the composer but ordered half the compensation to be paid.

Diligent guardians of intellectual property

After a resounding victory in the case against the Naka band, Oleg Movchan's career took a specific turn. In the information space, he began to appear not so much as an author of new hits, but as a person promoting legal responsibility for copyright infringement. In the same year, 2015, he was elected chairman of the authors' council of the National Center for Intellectual Property (NCIP).

Having received an official position, the composer launched a large-scale legal campaign. Under his leadership, dozens of lawsuits were won against cable operators who had not paid royalties for years. This allowed an increase in royalty collections at the NCIP by 30%.

In 2018, Movchan went international, becoming president of the Eurasian Confederation of Rights Holders Societies.

A symbol of this stage was the medal of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), awarded to the composer shortly after his death in 2019.

The irony of fate: the only known award to the composer was not awarded for his contribution to national musical culture, but actually for his successes in the legal field and the creation of legal precedent.

Receiving the award on behalf of her husband, Iryna Vidava formulated their family credo: "Oleg, by his example, often at the cost of his own health, showed that one can and must defend one's rights."

Павялічыць

After her husband's death, Iryna Vidava not only inherited his legacy but also took his place in the system, heading the authors' council of the NCIP. She held this position until 2022, when she was replaced by Iryna Darofeyeva.

Music held hostage by the law

The situation surrounding "Prayer" seems paradoxical. On one side are figures of the first magnitude: Yanka Kupala, whose words have long become public domain, and Vladimir Mulyavin, whose brilliant performance and powerful voice made the work iconic.

On the other side are the Movchan family, who, armed with copyright, like gentry with the right of liberum veto, can not only overshadow the jubilee of the great Pesnyar but also generally bury a work of national significance, guided either by their own commercial interests or by personal grievances.

And although formally the widow acts within the bounds of law, this struggle seems petty and even disgraceful when the rights holder goes so far as to block videos of concerts uploaded to the internet. These videos are shot by ordinary people who have no connection to the organization of events, but simply came to enjoy Mulyavin's work and honor his memory.

Such aggressive defense of rights leads to all creativity associated with Oleg Movchan becoming toxic. The risk of receiving a lawsuit, a YouTube block, or a demand for large compensation for performing a famous song outweighs any artistic expediency. Instead of popularizing her husband's legacy, the widow's actions lead to the opposite effect.

As a result, "Prayer" performed by Mulyavin risks becoming a monument to an uncompromising struggle for "intellectual property," where the right to ban the performance of a work turned out to be more important than the right of Belarusians to hear a wonderful work.

• 12
• 2
• 8
• 53
• 1
• 2
• 22
• 0