The Battle for Light of Motiram: Sony and Tencent's Legal Fray
In a recent development, Sony and Tencent have agreed to postpone their highly anticipated preliminary injunction (PI) hearing until 2026, with a proposed date of January 15th. This delay, however, is not without its complexities and controversies.
Let's dive into the details and uncover the intriguing aspects of this intellectual property dispute.
The Story So Far
Two weeks ago, Sony initiated legal action against Tencent's upcoming game, Light of Motiram, alleging copyright and trademark infringements. Sony sought an urgent PI hearing, aiming to halt the game's pre-release promotion, scheduled for October 17, 2025. The case was assigned to Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley, a name familiar to gamers due to her involvement in the FTC v. Microsoft-ActivisionBlizzard case.
Why the Delay?
The delay in the PI hearing can be attributed to two key factors:
- Scheduling Conflict: Sony's lead counsel, Annette Hurst from Orrick, has a conflicting engagement on the same day. She will be representing Microsoft in a discovery hearing related to an AI copyright dispute against The New York Times Company.
- Tencent's Request: Tencent requested additional time to respond to Sony's PI motion, beyond the usual two-week period.
Tencent's Reply Brief
On October 29, 2025, Tencent filed its reply brief, defending its motion to dismiss (MTD) Sony's complaint. Tencent's brief reinforces its original arguments, but it fails to address some of Sony's strongest opposition points.
Direct Impact and Implications
1. PI Hearing Postponement: Any hearing date after December 4 would likely not have resulted in a decision before the end of the year due to the court's busy schedule. At this stage, a PI would only impact the game's pre-release promotions, with the actual release still two years away.
2. Tencent's Brief Analysis: While well-crafted, Tencent's reply brief does not effectively counter Sony's arguments. The focus of the postponed hearing will be on the PI motion, with the MTD taking a backseat.
The Aloy and Mickey Mouse Debate
One of the key points of contention is whether the tribal huntress character, Aloy, from Sony's Horizon Zero Dawn, has trademark status despite its changing appearance. Tencent draws attention to Disney's multiple Mickey Mouse trademark registrations, arguing that a single trademark may not be sufficient to protect a character's identity.
Striking a Balance
This case highlights the delicate balance between protecting intellectual property and fostering innovation. Unlike the Nintendo v. Pocketpair dispute, where gamers largely sided with Nintendo, the public debate surrounding Sony v. Tencent reflects a more nuanced perspective. Gamers express sympathy for Sony's actions, but there are concerns about the potential stifling of creativity.
PI Schedule Proposal
Judge Corley is likely to approve Tencent's request for an extended deadline to file their opposition, with a proposed date of December 3, 2025. Sony's lead counsel's unavailability due to the New York Times v. Microsoft & OpenAI discovery hearing on December 4 is beyond dispute. However, Judge Corley's availability for the January 15 hearing remains uncertain, and a slightly later date may be considered.
The Mickey Mouse Argument
Tencent's argument regarding the multiplicity of Mickey Mouse trademarks is intriguing but lacks strength. The registrations were likely aimed at preventing unauthorized use of similar marks, rather than protecting Mickey Mouse's various appearances. Additionally, the trademark registrations relate to different product categories, which is not the case with Aloy.
Final Thoughts
As the legal battle unfolds, the focus will be on whether Sony can successfully argue that the variable elements of Aloy constitute trademark infringement. Tencent, on the other hand, may be content with a PI against specific promotional elements, leaving the game's release relatively unaffected.
And here's the part most people miss... What are your thoughts on this intellectual property dispute? Do you think Sony's actions are justified, or is there a risk of stifling creativity? Join the discussion and share your insights in the comments below!
