Sony vs Tencent lawsuit: Sony alleges that Tencent’s Light of Motiram reproduces distinctive elements of the Horizon series, filing a 35‑page court complaint seeking damages and an injunction while Tencent insists genre conventions cannot be monopolized.
-
Sony alleges specific copying of Horizon’s design and marketing materials.
-
Tencent argues the case seeks to monopolize common genre conventions.
-
Official filings and U.S. trademark records are cited; Sony requests monetary damages and an injunction.
Sony vs Tencent lawsuit: court filing says Light of Motiram copies Horizon. COINOTAG summarizes claims, defenses, and legal stakes. Read the latest update.
Published: 2025-10-16 | Updated: 2025-10-16 | Author: COINOTAG
What is the Sony vs Tencent lawsuit?
Sony vs Tencent lawsuit is a copyright and trademark case in which Sony Interactive Entertainment (SIE) alleges that Tencent’s upcoming title, Light of Motiram, deliberately copies unique creative elements from Sony’s Horizon series. Sony’s 35‑page court filing seeks unspecified monetary damages and an order preventing further infringement, citing trademark registrations and promotional usage.
How did Sony allege Light of Motiram copied Horizon?
Sony’s filing claims the similarities extend beyond broad genre traits to specific imagery, mechanics, and marketing tropes that, according to SIE, could only result from intentional copying. The complaint notes that Tencent or affiliated entities hold the U.S. trademark for Light of Motiram and the official lightofmotiram.com domain, and that promotional videos, screenshots and marketing materials have been distributed globally and remain visible on platforms including YouTube, Steam, Discord, and Epic Games Store. Sony also cites public reactions from games journalists and players as evidence that the allegedly derivative design has caused consumer confusion.
What is Tencent’s defense in the case?
Tencent’s response characterizes Sony’s claims as overbroad and “startling,” asserting that the disputed elements are common genre conventions used across many titles. Tencent argues SIE is attempting to fence off long‑standing storytelling and design devices — such as mechanical creatures, red‑haired protagonists, and ruined-world settings — that appear in multiple prior games (examples listed in filings include Far Cry, The Legend of Zelda, Enslaved, Outer Wilds, and Biomutant, cited as plain text). Tencent has also moved to dismiss on jurisdictional and pleading grounds, contending the parent company is not directly responsible for the actions of subsidiaries and affiliated brands.
Frequently Asked Questions
What damages is Sony seeking in the Horizon v Light of Motiram case?
Sony is asking for unspecified monetary damages and an injunction to stop Tencent from continuing alleged infringements. The complaint frames relief as necessary to prevent ongoing consumer confusion and to protect Sony’s intellectual property rights, referencing trademark records and promotional exposure in support of monetary and equitable remedies.
Will the court block Light of Motiram from being distributed in the U.S.?
The outcome depends on judicial findings on copying, trademark use, and jurisdiction. Sony has requested a blocking order, but courts require a showing of likely success on the merits and potential harm; any regional distribution restrictions would follow judicial rulings or negotiated settlements. This answer summarizes filings and does not predict rulings.
Key Takeaways
- Specific Allegations: Sony claims Light of Motiram reproduces distinctive Horizon elements and cites promotional materials and trademark registrations as evidence.
- Defendant’s Position: Tencent contends the case improperly seeks to monopolize common genre conventions and has moved to dismiss.
- Next Steps: The court will resolve jurisdictional and substantive motions; Sony seeks damages and an injunction while Tencent pursues dismissal and defense of industry norms.
Conclusion
The Sony vs Tencent lawsuit centers on competing views of what constitutes protectable creative expression versus permissible use of genre conventions. Sony relies on a 35‑page court filing, U.S. trademark records, and visible promotional material to support claims of copying, while Tencent frames the dispute as an improper attempt to claim exclusive rights over widely used game elements. COINOTAG will continue to monitor court filings and official records for updates; readers interested in legal developments should watch for formal court orders and subsequent filings.
Sources referenced as plain text: Sony Interactive Entertainment court filing; Tencent defense filings; U.S. trademark records; public promotional materials and platform listings (YouTube, Steam, Discord, Epic Games Store); press and community reactions reported by games journalists.
