Sony won an English High Court case against the company behind Lik-Sang on October 18, 2006. Six days later, Lik-Sang announced it was closing and blamed multiple Sony lawsuits. Sony denied causing the shutdown. The court found infringement over Japanese-market PSPs sold into Europe; it did not order Lik-Sang to close.
What Lik-Sang was selling—and why European gamers bought from it
Lik-Sang was the trading name associated with Pacific Game Technology (Holding) Ltd., a Hong Kong-based online retailer of Asian gaming hardware, software, accessories and electronics. Its business relied in part on parallel importing: buying genuine goods intended for one market and reselling them in another, outside the manufacturer’s authorized distribution channel.
For European customers, that could mean access to Japanese hardware before a European release or to products not readily available locally. The disputed PlayStation Portable (PSP) consoles were genuine Sony products intended for Japan, not counterfeit devices. The conflict was about whether Sony’s European intellectual-property rights allowed those Japan-market units to be offered to customers in the UK and elsewhere in the European Economic Area (EEA). Pinsent Masons’ contemporary account describes Lik-Sang’s import business and the case.
There was an earlier Sony case, but it was different
The PSP dispute was not the first legal conflict between Sony and Lik-Sang. Sony had pursued Hong Kong proceedings in 2002 involving mod chips and modified PlayStation and PlayStation 2 hardware, including allegations about devices that circumvented copy protection. That case concerned modified consoles and circumvention; the later English action concerned Japanese-market PSPs sold into the EEA. They should not be treated as one lawsuit. The Hong Kong proceedings provide the earlier case context.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEFix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →#1 Best Overall
- Sony PSP 3000 International Console, Fully Technician Tested.
Why Sony challenged the PSP imports
Sony alleged infringement of registered trade marks, registered designs and copyright associated with the PSP, including rights relating to software, icons, packaging or surface design, and manuals. The central legal question was not whether the consoles were authentic. It was whether Sony had consented to Japan-intended products being marketed in Europe, so that its relevant rights there had been exhausted.
Parallel imports and exhaustion
In some circumstances, an intellectual-property owner’s control over goods is limited after those goods are first placed on a market with its consent. But the relevant market and consent matter. Sony argued that selling a product in Japan did not amount to consent to its sale in the EEA. The court accepted that position on the evidence before it and found no express or implied consent to European marketing. The judgment’s reasoning addresses the exhaustion issue.
Why a Hong Kong retailer faced a UK case
The court considered whether Lik-Sang’s online business was directed at UK and EEA customers, rather than treating it as a Hong Kong-only operation that had merely received overseas orders. Relevant indicators included English-language content, pound sterling prices, European-language materials, UK customer testimonials, promotions aimed at European buyers and a test purchase shipped from Hong Kong to the UK. The company’s location alone did not settle whether its sales targeted the market in which Sony asserted rights.
Rank #2
- Sony PSP 3000 International Console, Fully Technician Tested.
What the High Court decided
In KK Sony Computer Entertainment & Anor v Pacific Game Technology (Holding) Ltd, [2006] EWHC 2509 (Pat), claim HC 05 C02121, the High Court of Justice, Chancery Division, Patents Court, issued judgment for Sony on October 18, 2006. The action was undefended at the final hearing: the defendant did not appear. Sony asked for a reasoned judgment rather than relying only on a default judgment.
Outdated Drivers Are Slowing You Down
One free scan finds every outdated or missing driver and matches the right update for your exact hardware.Free scan · exact hardware matchPC Slower Than It Used to Be?
A free scan shows the junk files, broken settings and background clutter dragging Windows down - then fixes them in one click.Free scan · Windows 10 & 11The court found infringement in offering Japan-intended PSP consoles for sale in the EEA without Sony’s consent, addressing trade marks, designs and copyright as well as the exhaustion arguments. This was a formal court ruling, but it was not the result of a fully contested final hearing with both sides presenting their cases. The judgment supports a conclusion about the particular products, rights and facts before the court—not a universal prohibition on all grey-market imports. Read the published judgment.
How the judgment and closure unfolded
| Date | Event | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| 2002 | Sony pursued Hong Kong litigation involving mod chips and modified PlayStation hardware. | An earlier dispute, legally distinct from the PSP import case. |
| August 2005 | Sony Computer Entertainment Europe began UK proceedings over PSP imports. | The later case focused on Japanese-market consoles offered to European customers. |
| October 18, 2006 | The High Court issued its reasoned judgment, [2006] EWHC 2509 (Pat). | Sony won the undefended infringement action. |
| October 24, 2006 | Lik-Sang published an “Out of Business Notice” and said it would stop taking orders. | The company attributed its closure to multiple Sony legal actions. |
| October 25, 2006 | Sony’s response disputing responsibility for the closure was reported. | The parties offered competing explanations for the shutdown. |
Some contemporary coverage referred to an October 9 ruling. The formal reasoned judgment is dated October 18; the dates should not be conflated. The Register’s October 23 report covers the contemporary account and the case’s wider context.
Rank #3
- Sony PSP 3000 International Console, Fully Technician Tested.
Why Lik-Sang said it was closing
In its October 24 notice, Lik-Sang said it was forced to close by multiple legal actions brought by Sony Computer Entertainment Europe and Sony Computer Entertainment Inc. It said it would stop accepting new orders, cancel and refund existing orders, work with banks and PayPal on store-credit refunds, and address pending returns, repairs and shipping issues.
That establishes what Lik-Sang said and the timing of its announcement; it does not establish that a court ordered the business to shut down or that it entered a particular insolvency process. The closure notice and Sony response were reproduced contemporaneously in an AnandTech forum archive.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
Sony disputed that it caused the closure
Sony characterized Lik-Sang’s announcement as “sour grapes.” Its position was that it had won an intellectual-property case against Pacific Game Technology, that Lik-Sang had not contested the UK action, and that substantial awarded costs remained unpaid. Sony denied that its actions had caused the shutdown.
Rank #4
- Sony PSP 3000 International Console, Fully Technician Tested.
Sony also framed its litigation as consumer protection, citing concerns about differences between imported hardware and officially distributed European products, including electrical or voltage differences, compatibility issues with some later products, and the absence of Sony warranty coverage. Those were Sony’s stated concerns, not a finding that every PSP sold by Lik-Sang was unsafe or incompatible.
Lik-Sang disputed the safety rationale, saying its PSP units came with genuine Sony 100–240V AC adapters bearing CE and other safety markings and complied with applicable UK and EU requirements. Lik-Sang also alleged that senior Sony Europe employees had bought PSP hardware or software from its store before the litigation. Sony said employee purchases were for investigative purposes and criticized disclosure of customer information. The employee-purchase allegation remains an attributed claim, not an established court finding. GameSpot’s October 25 report covers the competing statements and the closure.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Why the case mattered beyond one retailer
The dispute landed as Sony prepared for the European launch of PlayStation 3, after its Japanese and North American launches. Contemporary coverage interpreted the case as a warning to retailers considering grey-market PlayStation hardware, potentially including early PS3 imports. That is relevant industry context, but the available account does not establish that preventing PS3 imports was the sole legal purpose of the PSP action.
Best Value
- Sony PSP 3000 International Console, Fully Technician Tested.
For online retailers, the case illustrated a tension between global commerce and territorial distribution rights: authentic goods can still raise intellectual-property issues when they are marketed into a region without the rights holder’s consent. It also illustrated a practical risk of cross-border sales: a business based elsewhere may face a claim in a market its website and sales activity target. Neither point means the judgment outlawed grey imports generally, or that every cross-border sale of a genuine product has the same legal outcome.
So, did Sony sue Lik-Sang out of business?
The clearest answer separates what is established from what is disputed. Sony won the English case; Lik-Sang announced its closure six days after the formal judgment and blamed multiple Sony actions; Sony denied responsibility and pointed to the undefended case and unpaid costs. The timing is clear, but the court did not find that Sony had caused the closure or order Lik-Sang to cease trading. “Sony sued Lik-Sang out of business” is defensible shorthand for Lik-Sang’s account of the consequences, not a formal legal finding.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
