The legal battle between Sony and Tencent over Light of Motiram just took a dramatic turn. In a court filing dated December 1, 2025, Tencent agreed to completely halt all marketing and public testing for their controversial survival game until Sony’s request for a preliminary injunction gets resolved. The hearing that could decide the game’s fate is scheduled for January 29, 2026, and the stakes couldn’t be higher – Sony is seeking up to $150,000 per copyrighted work infringed and wants the game blocked entirely.
What Tencent Just Agreed To
The stipulation filed in California’s Northern District federal court outlines specific concessions Tencent made to Sony in exchange for more time to prepare their legal defense. First, there will be no new promotion or public testing of Light of Motiram while Sony’s motion for a preliminary injunction remains pending. This means no trailers, no screenshots, no dev diaries, and absolutely no closed beta tests or early access programs.
Second, Tencent promised the game’s release will not move up from its current Q4 2027 window. This prevents them from rushing the game to market before the court can issue an injunction. Third, Tencent agreed not to argue that Sony delayed in seeking emergency relief, even though the extension gives them more time to respond. Finally, Tencent will not request expedited discovery connected to the preliminary injunction motion.
The court filing states both parties have been “engaged in discussions in order to resolve the current dispute,” suggesting behind-the-scenes negotiations are happening. Sony requested these concessions before agreeing to extend Tencent’s response deadline from December 3 to December 17, 2025. Sony’s reply is now due January 2, 2026, with the combined hearing for both the motion to dismiss and the injunction request scheduled for January 29, 2026.
Why Sony Called It a Slavish Clone
Sony’s original lawsuit, filed July 28, 2025, doesn’t mince words. The complaint repeatedly describes Light of Motiram as a “slavish clone” of the Horizon franchise, accusing Tencent of deliberately copying protectable elements to a significant degree. The allegations go far beyond surface-level similarities – Sony claims systematic copying of character design, machine creatures, world aesthetics, marketing materials, and even musical themes.
The most damning comparisons come from trailer analysis. Light of Motiram’s reveal trailer opens with a close-up of a massive robotic creature’s foot before showcasing ancient ruins and a tribal woman witnessing herds of mechanical animals. These shots mirror scenes from Horizon Zero Dawn’s E3 2015 trailer, launch trailer, and opening cutscene almost frame-for-frame. Both games feature post-apocalyptic settings in the 31st century with tall red grass as a signature visual element.
The protagonists raise immediate red flags. Both feature red-haired female leads wearing tribal clothing augmented with technological elements, wielding bows as primary weapons while hunting robotic creatures in overgrown wilderness. The machine designs show striking similarities – from four-legged mechanized animals to flying drones and massive apex predators constructed from metal and cables. Sony’s lawsuit includes side-by-side comparisons showing how specific creature silhouettes, movement patterns, and design philosophies were allegedly copied.
Even the marketing approach mirrors Horizon’s strategy. Light of Motiram’s Steam page originally featured cover art composition nearly identical to Horizon Forbidden West’s promotional materials – so similar that Tencent quietly changed it after the lawsuit was filed. Steam users noticed immediately, with comments included in Sony’s legal filing calling it “shameless” and asking if Tencent “had the cheek to copy the cover art as well.”
The Partnership That Never Happened
Court documents reveal a particularly damaging timeline. At the Game Developers Conference in San Francisco during March 2024, Tencent approached Sony with a partnership proposal. They wanted to collaborate on developing a Horizon game set in Asia, presumably leveraging Tencent’s understanding of Asian markets while using Sony’s established IP. Sony reviewed the pitch and ultimately declined the collaboration.
Here’s where things get legally problematic for Tencent. Sony alleges that Tencent had already begun developing Light of Motiram in 2023, before the partnership pitch even happened. This suggests Tencent approached Sony knowing they had a competing product in development, possibly to gain insider knowledge about Horizon’s future plans or to test whether Sony would license the IP. When Sony said no, Tencent allegedly continued developing their game with full knowledge of how closely it resembled Horizon.
This sequence of events strengthens Sony’s case considerably. It demonstrates Tencent’s awareness of the Horizon franchise, potential access to detailed information through the partnership discussions, and a decision to proceed with a similar product despite Sony’s refusal to collaborate. In intellectual property law, proving the defendant had access to copyrighted works and created something substantially similar often establishes infringement, especially when combined with evidence of willful copying.
How the Gaming Community Reacted
Sony’s lawsuit strategically incorporates public reactions to strengthen their case. Gaming media immediately dubbed Light of Motiram “Horizon Zero Originality” when it was announced. YouTube comments, Reddit discussions, and Steam reviews flooded with accusations of shameless copying. One particularly direct Steam comment reads – “Not only does it look like a copy of the Horizon games, but you had the cheek to copy the cover art as well.”
This widespread recognition of similarity matters legally. When ordinary consumers immediately identify one product as copying another without needing expert analysis, it demonstrates what IP lawyers call “substantial similarity” – a key test for copyright infringement. Sony argues this consumer confusion about whether Light of Motiram is affiliated with Horizon proves Tencent misappropriated their intellectual property to deceive the market.
The gaming community’s reaction split along predictable lines. Some defend Tencent’s right to create games in similar genres, arguing that post-apocalyptic robot hunting isn’t inherently copyrightable. Others point out that copying isn’t just about genre – it’s about the specific combination of visual design, character presentation, creature aesthetics, world-building choices, and marketing approach that makes Light of Motiram feel like a bootleg Horizon rather than a game inspired by similar themes.
What Tencent Claims in Their Defense
Tencent’s legal response argues that Sony is attempting to monopolize the entire genre of games featuring female protagonists fighting robotic creatures in post-apocalyptic worlds. They claim copyright law protects specific expression, not general ideas or themes, and that multiple games can exist in similar settings without infringing each other’s rights. This defense has precedent – you can’t copyright the concept of space marines fighting aliens, which is why dozens of games exist in that genre.
The counterargument from Sony focuses on the degree and specificity of copying. It’s not just that both games feature robot dinosaurs – it’s that specific creature designs, proportions, movement patterns, and visual signatures appear nearly identical. It’s not just red-haired female protagonists – it’s the specific combination of tribal clothing, tech augmentation, bow-focused combat, and visual presentation that creates overall similarity.
Tencent also notes that they removed the most obviously copied elements after Sony filed the lawsuit, suggesting they’re willing to make changes to differentiate Light of Motiram. However, Sony argues these changes came only after being caught and sued, not as good-faith efforts to create an original product from the start. Courts generally view post-lawsuit modifications with skepticism when evaluating original intent.
Why This Case Matters for Gaming
The Light of Motiram lawsuit represents a critical test for how intellectual property law applies to video games in an era where asset creation tools, game engines, and development knowledge are widely accessible. Tencent’s massive resources let them replicate AAA production values quickly. If courts allow this level of copying, it could undermine incentives for studios to invest in original IP development when competitors can simply clone successful formulas.
On the other hand, overly broad IP protection could stifle innovation and prevent legitimate competition. The challenge for courts is drawing lines between unprotectable genre conventions and protectable creative expression. Where exactly does “post-apocalyptic robot hunting game” become “Horizon clone”? This case will establish precedent for answering that question.
The international dimension complicates matters further. Chinese gaming companies have faced criticism for years over cloning successful Western and Japanese games. Some argue this represents cultural differences in attitudes toward intellectual property. Others see it as straightforward theft enabled by lax IP enforcement in China. The fact that this lawsuit is happening in U.S. federal court gives Sony more legal protection than they’d have trying to enforce rights in Chinese courts.
What Happens in January 2026
The January 29, 2026 hearing will address both Tencent’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit entirely and Sony’s request for a preliminary injunction blocking Light of Motiram’s release. If the judge grants the preliminary injunction, Light of Motiram gets frozen indefinitely until the full case resolves – potentially years from now. If the motion to dismiss succeeds, Sony’s lawsuit gets thrown out and Tencent can proceed with development and marketing.
More likely, the court will deny the motion to dismiss but require Sony to prove their case at trial before issuing a permanent injunction. This means months or years of discovery, depositions, expert testimony, and legal maneuvering before final resolution. During that time, Light of Motiram remains stuck in limbo – technically allowed to proceed but practically frozen by the marketing ban and legal uncertainty.
Settlement remains possible. Tencent could pay Sony damages and agree to significantly modify the game’s design to eliminate similarities. Sony might accept licensing fees in exchange for allowing a Horizon-inspired game to proceed under their supervision. Or both sides could dig in for a protracted court battle to establish precedent for future cases. The current agreement suggests both parties prefer negotiation over immediate confrontation, but that could change after January’s hearing.
FAQs
What is Light of Motiram?
Light of Motiram is an open-world survival game developed by Polaris Quest and published by Tencent. Set in a post-apocalyptic future, it features a female protagonist hunting robotic creatures. Sony alleges it’s a “slavish clone” of their Horizon franchise.
Why did Sony sue Tencent?
Sony filed a lawsuit in July 2025 alleging copyright and trademark infringement, claiming Light of Motiram systematically copied protectable elements from Horizon Zero Dawn and Horizon Forbidden West, including character design, creature aesthetics, world-building, and marketing materials.
What did Tencent agree to in December 2025?
Tencent agreed to pause all marketing and public testing for Light of Motiram while Sony’s preliminary injunction request is pending, not move the release date earlier than Q4 2027, and not argue Sony delayed in seeking emergency relief.
When is the court hearing?
January 29, 2026. The hearing will address both Tencent’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit and Sony’s request for a preliminary injunction blocking the game’s release.
Did Tencent approach Sony about a partnership?
Yes. Court documents show Tencent pitched Sony a collaboration to develop a Horizon game set in Asia at GDC in March 2024. Sony declined, and Tencent allegedly continued developing Light of Motiram, which Sony claims was already in development since 2023.
How much money is Sony seeking?
Up to $150,000 in statutory damages for each separate copyrighted work infringed. Given the number of specific elements Sony claims were copied, this could total millions of dollars.
When was Light of Motiram supposed to release?
The game is currently scheduled for Q4 2027. Under the new agreement, Tencent cannot move this release date earlier while the legal case is pending.
Can I still find Light of Motiram trailers online?
Yes, previously released marketing materials remain available online. However, Tencent agreed to create no new promotional content while the injunction motion is pending.
What happens if Sony wins the lawsuit?
Sony could receive significant monetary damages and a permanent injunction blocking Light of Motiram’s release unless Tencent substantially redesigns the game to eliminate similarities to Horizon.
Conclusion
The Light of Motiram case represents far more than a simple copyright dispute between two gaming giants. It’s a referendum on how aggressively companies can borrow from successful formulas before crossing into infringement territory, a test of whether international gaming conglomerates can rapidly clone Western IP without consequences, and a precedent-setting moment for video game intellectual property protection. Tencent’s agreement to freeze marketing suggests they’re taking Sony’s legal threat seriously, but whether that fear comes from knowing they crossed legal lines or simply wanting to avoid expensive litigation remains unclear. The January 2026 hearing will provide the first major indication of how courts view this specific case, but the broader questions about gaming IP protection will likely take years to fully resolve through appeals and subsequent cases. For now, Light of Motiram sits in legal purgatory – a game that might never see release, might launch radically redesigned, or might prove that even obvious visual similarities don’t constitute copyright infringement if the underlying gameplay mechanics differ enough. Whatever happens, developers watching this case will learn exactly how much inspiration crosses into imitation in the eyes of U.S. courts.