Sony Escalates Legal Battle: Files Preliminary Injunction Against Tencent Over ‘Slavish Clone’ Light of Motiram

Advertisement

High-Stakes Legal Maneuvers in Gaming: Sony Seeks Preemptive Ban on Tencent’s Light of Motiram

Current developments in the ongoing intellectual property dispute between gaming behemoth Sony Interactive Entertainment (SIE) and Chinese tech giant Tencent Holdings have intensified, with Sony filing a motion for a preliminary injunction against Tencent’s upcoming open-world survival game, Light of Motiram. This move signals a significant escalation in the legal battle, aiming to preemptively halt promotional activities and development on the title which Sony has previously labeled a “slavish clone” of its highly successful Horizon Zero Dawn and Horizon Forbidden West franchises.

The injunction request, filed with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, seeks a court order that would bar Tencent and its associated development studio, Polaris Quest, from using any material deemed “copied or derived” from the Horizon intellectual property (IP). Crucially, this includes preventing the use of a key character—a red-haired, tribal huntress—and specific visual, narrative, and even musical elements that Sony asserts are too closely aligned with its proprietary work.

The Core of the Copyright Infringement Claim: Aloy’s Lookalike and World Design

Sony’s initial lawsuit, filed in July 2025, outlined numerous striking similarities between the two games. According to SIE, Light of Motiram mimics the unique aesthetic blend of its franchise: a post-apocalyptic world where tribal societies coexist with colossal, animal-like machines. Furthermore, the core of the dispute centers on the protagonist of the Tencent game, who critics and fans alike immediately noted bore an uncanny resemblance to Horizon’s lead character, Aloy—a fierce, red-haired warrior.

Court documents filed by Sony include sworn declarations from high-ranking PlayStation and Guerrilla Games executives. Jan-Bart van Beek, Studio Director at Guerrilla Games, is reported to have stated that Light of Motiram “simply copies Horizon in almost every respect—including artwork, imagery, landscape, characters, sound, and storyline.” He further claimed that the blatant imitation has already caused public confusion, with many fans mistaking the rival project for a new Horizon sequel or spin-off, potentially impacting studio morale and future planning for the multi-million dollar franchise.

Tencent’s Defense: ‘Well-Trodden Tropes’ and a ‘Shell Game’ Allegation

Tencent, in its counter-arguments, has sought to dismiss the lawsuit, characterizing Sony’s claims as an attempt to establish an “impermissible monopoly on genre conventions.” They argue that the elements in question—such as a post-apocalyptic setting, robot animals, and a tribal protagonist—are merely “well-trodden tropes” shared across various media, including other high-budget video games. Tencent also highlighted past internal discussions at Guerrilla about Horizon’s own similarities to an earlier title, Enslaved: Odyssey to the West, to reinforce their defense.

However, Sony’s injunction filing directly addresses this defense, accusing Tencent of “playing a shell game” to avoid liability. SIE points to Tencent’s actions following the initial lawsuit, specifically the quiet purging of most Horizon-like promotional material—including screenshots of the red-haired heroine—from the Light of Motiram Steam page, and a significant delay of the game’s projected release date from late 2025 to late 2027. Sony argues that these actions do not negate the damage already done by months of public promotion featuring the infringing content.

Why a Preliminary Injunction Matters for the Gaming Market

The request for a preliminary injunction is a critical legal tool because it demands immediate action from the court before a full trial can be held. For Sony, securing this injunction is crucial to mitigate what it terms “irreparable harm” to the Horizon IP’s brand value and future commercial success. This harm is amplified by the fact that Sony is actively expanding the franchise into new media, including an upcoming Horizon Zero Dawn film adaptation (Source: DualShockers, October 2025), which is currently in pre-production.

• Brand Protection: Sony aims to prevent consumer confusion, especially in the highly competitive and lucrative open-world games market.
• Financial Impact: The continuation of Light of Motiram’s current promotional campaign could devalue the Horizon brand, negatively impacting future sales of games, merchandise, and media rights.
• Precedent Setting: The outcome of this case holds significant implications for the global games development landscape, particularly regarding the legal boundaries of inspiration versus blatant copying, a debate frequently revisited in the survival game genre and AAA game development.

Tencent, conversely, argues that with a release date still years away, Sony cannot demonstrate the “immediate threatened injury” required for a preliminary injunction. The court is expected to rule on this motion—which includes a request to bar the use of the Aloy-like character mark—before the end of the year, potentially setting a major precedent for copyright law in the digital entertainment sector.

Analysis: The Future of Horizon and IP Defense

The aggressive stance taken by Sony in this lawsuit underscores the value of the Horizon franchise, which has sold over 38 million copies globally (Source: Court Filings, July 2025). The company is clearly intent on making a strong example of intellectual property defense, particularly against a player as massive and influential as Tencent in the international gaming market.

Regardless of the final outcome, this high-profile legal battle has brought the fine line between ‘homage’ and ‘infringement’ back into the spotlight. For developers worldwide, the case serves as a sober reminder of the enormous financial and legal risks associated with creating games that closely mirror successful, protected IPs. The entire video game industry awaits the court’s decision, which will undoubtedly influence licensing deals and game design choices for years to come.