Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram

Channel

Творческий юрист Наталья Левених

@creative_lawyer

On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Polls · Citations · Cite this entry

5,270subscribers

+12 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001906652153
TypeChannel
Username@creative_lawyer
CreatedBetween 1 March 2023 and 30 November 2023— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live13 August 2026
Measurements held3
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 13 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/creative_lawyer

Growth

5,2575,2705,263.56 August 2026 — 5,258 subscribers6 August 2026 — 5,257 subscribers13 August 2026 — 5,270 subscribers6 August 202613 August 2026
3 measurements spanning 7 days, net +12. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 5,255–5,272 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
13 Aug 2026, 02:335,270+13
6 Aug 2026, 14:425,257-1
6 Aug 2026, 08:165,258first reading

Engagement

20 posts held, back to 9 July 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 8 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
22.3%
avg views ÷ 5,270 subscribers
Avg views / post
1,180
18 posts measured
Reaction rate
3.66%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
18
of 20 held

ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.

ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 11 August 2026
Posts held20 (9 July 202611 August 2026)
Views total21,195
Reactions total775
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken12 Aug 2026, 04:33 UTC

Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.

Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.

Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.

Reaction mix

863 reactions across 20 posts, in 11 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 50.5% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
43650.5%
🔥18421.3%
🤝16519.1%
👍424.87%
👀80.927%
👏80.927%
🤔70.811%
😁60.695%
30.348%
20.232%
😱20.232%

No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.

Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.

Coverage. Reactions were read on 20 of the 20 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 863reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 9 July 2026 to 11 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.

Recent posts

11 Aug 2026, 07:26 UTC512 views6 reactionsread 12 August 2026

Стоит ли не-юристу использовать нейросети для юридических задач? Напишите свое мнение, пожалуйста! Изначально я не планировала включать этот вопрос в свою юридическую книгу. Тем более, что именно к авторскому праву он имеет мало отношения. Однако в последние полгода я всё чаще получаю вопросы о том, стоит ли советоваться с нейросетью по юридическим вопросам. А иногда мне даже приходится делать для клиентов юридиче

🔥51

10 Aug 2026, 04:52 UTC725 views56 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

Как Харуки Мураками “подорвал репутацию” целого города, или еще немного о деловой репутации На днях я разбирала книги на даче, и под руку мне попался сборник рассказов Харуки Мураками “Мужчины без женщин”. Мураками я люблю с юности, так что решила перечитать. И в предисловии наткнулась на любопытный юридический кейс (да-да, везде “станки, станки”). В сборнике есть рассказ “Сядь за руль моей машины/Drive my car”. Ег

43👍10🔥2😁1

6 Aug 2026, 05:25 UTC≈1,040 views52 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

Юрист пишет прозу: как мы с редактором отказались от вина в пользу чая В еженедельной рубрике #юрист пишет прозу рассказываю о своем писательском опыте с юридической оптикой. Сегодня поговорим о возрастной маркировке. Когда я писала свой сборник рассказов, то о маркировке не думала. Ведь основная целевая аудитория книги — матери, детям, которых от 4 до 44 лет. Очевидно, эти люди уже достигли совершеннолетия =) Но

37👀8👍4🔥2🤝1

5 Aug 2026, 04:04 UTC962 views23 reactionsread 12 August 2026

Фрэнсис Бэкон и рождение “Чужого”: вдохновение или переработка? * здесь могла бы быть картинка для привлечения внимания, но я вас пожалела В одном из прошлых постов мы говорили о посмертном обнародовании произведений. А заодно о том, как некоторые художники уничтожали свои картины, считая их недостаточно прекрасными — кто перед смертью, а кто и в течение жизни. Меня поразила история Фрэнсиса Бэкона, который сдела

15👍4🔥2🤝2

4 Aug 2026, 05:38 UTC827 views7 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Poll

Если в научно-популярной книге примеры те же, что и в блоге автора, мне это…

  1. скорее нравится12%
  2. скорее не нравится43%
  3. все равно43%
  4. свой ответ в комментарии (см. пост выше)2%

Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

🤔5👍2

4 Aug 2026, 05:36 UTC839 views16 reactionsread 12 August 2026

Одни и те же примеры в книге и в блоге - как относитесь? У нас тут с бета-ридерами моей юридической книги (подробнее про неё вот тут) возникла небольшая дискуссия. Решила и с вами посоветоваться =) Допустим, вы подписаны на блог профессионала — юриста, специалиста по продажам, фотографа, редактора. Он излагает полезный вам материал, снабжая его примерами. Потом профессионал решает написать книгу, вы ее покупаете, и

7🔥6🤝3

3 Aug 2026, 04:00 UTC≈1,100 views40 reactionsread 12 August 2026

Право автора на имя Право на имя — это право автора использовать или разрешать использование произведения под собственным именем, анонимно или под псевдонимом. Анонимное использование иногда путают с отказом от авторства или отказом от права на имя. Напрасно. Даже если на произведении не указано имя — это не значит, что у произведения нет автора. А отказ от права на имя, кстати, ничтожен в силу прямого указания за

35🤝4👍1

31 Jul 2026, 05:41 UTC≈1,240 views29 reactionsread 12 August 2026

Конец июля и топ 5 постов 1. К вопросу о технических заданиях в договорах авторского заказа Развеиваем миф о том, что краткое техническое задание выгодно исполнителю или заказчику В пару к нему хорошо пойдет пост о техническом задании в договоре с иллюстратором 2. Субсубсубсубсублицензии - возможно ли? Обсуждаем цепочки сублицензий — когда лицензиат предоставляет разрешение на использование третьим лицам, а те — вс

21🔥4🤝4

30 Jul 2026, 08:45 UTC≈1,120 views48 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

Книжная газета БИЛЛИ Вырвалась на денек в город, заодно заехала в любимые "Подписные издания" — сдала старые книжки в "Академию" и забрала авторские экземпляры книжной газеты "БИЛЛИ" Не знаю даже, где приятнее ее читать — в "Подписных изданиях" или на даче =) Как поется в одной распевке: "и так хорошо, и сяк хорошо". Бумажная газета в наше время может показаться спорным решением. Я начинаю понимать, почему у моей б

36🔥12

29 Jul 2026, 06:58 UTC≈1,040 views52 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

Юрист пишет прозу: об упоминании брендов в книгах, мыльной пене и деловой репутации “Кря-кря” Иногда писатели спрашивают, можно ли использовать в книгах названия реальных брендов. Конечно, всегда нужно смотреть на конкретную ситуацию. Но если уж использовать — то лучше в позитивном или нейтральном контексте. Упоминание реально существующих товаров, мест, брендов и т.п. в негативном контексте может быть поводом для п

34👍8🤝7🔥3

28 Jul 2026, 12:29 UTC≈1,810 views138 reactionsread 12 August 2026

Книга по авторскому праву для не‑юристов: как это случилось Идея обобщить свой обширный опыт и написать книгу по авторскому праву бродила в моей голове давно. А финальным толчком послужила начавшаяся в феврале блокировка Телеграма. Я поняла, как мне жалко мой канал и все его материалы. Из интереса я решила проверить, сколько же знаков я написала за 2,5 года. Оказалось, что полмиллиона, то есть около 15 авторских л

🤝69🔥43242

27 Jul 2026, 09:51 UTC≈1,310 views39 reactionsread 12 August 2026

Защита чести, достоинства и деловой репутации На прошлой неделе мы обсуждали иск Федора Емельяненко к издательству Одно из оснований иска — защита чести, достоинства деловой репутации. 59 человек захотело побольше узнать об этой теме — откликаюсь. Честь, достоинство и деловая репутация — это так называемые нематериальные блага, и они охраняются законом. Если в отношении гражданина распространены порочащие сведения

26🔥8👍4🤝1

Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @creative_lawyer. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.

Polls

The poll we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered it when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.

4 Aug 2026, 05:38 UTCAnonymous Poll182 voters

Если в научно-популярной книге примеры те же, что и в блоге автора, мне это…

  1. скорее нравится12%
  2. скорее не нравится43%
  3. все равно43%
  4. свой ответ в комментарии (см. пост выше)2%

Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none.The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.

The shares need not add up to 100.Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.

Read from the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 9 July 2026 to 11 August 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.

Citation-graph rank

Citation-graph rank — 163,488 of 1,169,250entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.

Forward network

Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.

Mentions

Named by 12 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.

A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.

Cite this entry

A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 13 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“Творческий юрист Наталья Левених” (@creative_lawyer), 5,270 subscribers as measured 13 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/creative_lawyer.

Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.