Just last night, the official account of the Chinese original SLG game Infinite Borders updated a post with only nine short words: "This matter isn't over yet, don't rush."
Passing players might be confused by this, but those who have long followed the SLG gaming community or have some understanding of gaming-related laws might immediately think of the "most watched infringement case in the Chinese gaming circle" from two years ago, namely the "Infinite Borders vs. Three Kingdoms Tactics copyright infringement and unfair competition case."
In the first-instance judgment two years ago, the court recognized Infinite Borders as "other intellectual achievements meeting the characteristics of a work" under copyright law, and found that Three Kingdoms Tactics infringed upon multiple instances of Infinite Borders' "original expressions." The first-instance ruling determined that Three Kingdoms Tactics structurally used 79 specific rule designs from Infinite Borders, ultimately ruling that Three Kingdoms Tactics constituted copyright infringement. It ordered Jianyue to delete or modify the infringing content within thirty days and compensate NetEase 50 million yuan within ten days.
The court of first instance ruled that Three Kingdoms Tactics constituted use of Infinite Borders' original expressions.
In other words, the court of first instance ruled that Three Kingdoms Tactics constituted "gameplay infringement" against Infinite Borders. Prior to this, the question of whether "Does gameplay plagiarism constitute copyright infringement or unfair competition" has sparked significant controversy in judicial practice. However, the Guangzhou Internet Court's interpretation that "gameplay design contains original expression" marked a major breakthrough in its ruling, bringing the issue of "copyright infringement of gameplay" into the spotlight.
Three Kingdoms Tactics subsequently expressed dissatisfaction with the judgment and filed an appeal. On August 11, 2025, the case saw its latest development when the Guangzhou Intellectual Property Court ruled to send the case back for retrial. This does not negate the infringement; a retrial is merely a stage in the litigation process, not the end.
Therefore, the official Infinite Borders account stated "it's not over yet" in their post—because, indeed, with the case still under trial and no final judgment made on whether Three Kingdoms Tactics infringed, the dust has not yet settled. Neither game can claim to have "won" yet. This "most watched infringement case in the Chinese gaming circle" will continue for some time.
Announcement released by Infinite Borders in-game after the case status update
Although legally the question of "whether gameplay infringement constitutes infringement" remains unsettled, as a player, I believe that certain matters require caution based on intuition and experience, to help clarify laws against abuse.
It is undeniable that almost all modern games stand on the shoulders of predecessors. Whether in the SLG field where Infinite Borders and Three Kingdoms Tactics reside, or in genres like FPS and FTG, each has long derived its own set of effective and highly mature "basic gameplay."
Infinite Borders has also continuously made its own creative expressions. Beyond the "Rogue Army" and "Trends of the World" mentioned in the previous judgment, Infinite Borders was the first to introduce real-time weather, group AI, varied terrain, and naval combat into "Shuai Tu-like" games, which are now widely referenced in the industry. The character development system, including multiple tactics, awakening, and troop book advancement, was also first defined by Infinite Borders.
Just this year, Infinite Borders boldly innovated by launching the Youth Server, creating a new SLG model of "no paid gacha," which has been widely embraced by players and provided a low-barrier, fairer competitive stage for many young people.
Not long ago, Infinite Borders also announced a collaboration with Werewolf. Building upon the basic rules of Infinite Borders, players will be divided into the "Han Faction" and the "Warlord Faction," similar to Werewolf, with all players' factions kept secret.
What constitutes a unique interpretation beyond "basic gameplay"? I believe looking at Infinite Borders' Youth Server and the Infinite Borders + Werewolf collaboration provides one answer.
It can be said that those developers who insist on originality, continuously innovate upon basic gameplay, and expand the possibilities of gameplay are the greatest contributors to the gaming industry reaching the height of the "Ninth Art" today.
Now, the "most watched infringement case in the Chinese gaming circle," Infinite Borders vs. Three Kingdoms Tactics, has reached a new development. As ordinary players, perhaps we can only wait for the court to make a fair ruling—
Regardless of the outcome, this will be another major milestone in the history of Chinese gaming jurisprudence.