One note about the patent issue no one has mentioned: In order for a patent to be enforceable, the invention covered by the patent should not be exposed to the public before the application process has begun. In other words, you can't freely expose your invention to the public, then file a patent and expect it to hold up to legal challenges. A challenging party in this case will argue that the invention was already out there, so therefore can be no infringement on the patent. In patent suits, lawyers often dig into the past to determine if the invention was indeed exposed to the public. Makes sense, right? Protecting IP is tough business.
This is to say the Mikhail does have a sound justification for keeping the lid on his amps, literally. If pictures of his amp's internals circulate on, say, a website like this, his inventions may become difficult or impossible to protect via patents. So in my opinion he has good reason to request to keep the photos off the web. Heck, exposing the invention can damage his ability to enforce the patent, and thus damage the value of his business.
My last company was heavily involved in patenting technology and derived its value from enforcing patents. It's been a few years since I've done any of this kind of IP work -- I'm an entrepreneur, not a patent lawyer -- but I believe these details are generally accurate.
You could argue that Mikhail has gotten screwed twice here: once when his invention were exposed, and again when his integrity was impugned for asking people not to publish the photos. As a fellow entrepreneur, I feel sympathy for him.