Nintendo Updates Console EULA: We’ll Brick Your Shit If We Don’t Like What You Do With It
from the nintendon't dept
It’s no secret that Nintendo is among the most draconian actors when it comes to intellectual property. Techdirt is rife with posts on the various ways the company has been a royal and overreaching pain in the ass on anything with even the most modest concern over copyrights, trademarks, or patents. From attempting to unmask anonymous internet denizens over leaks, to failed lawsuits against South American grocers over nonsense trademark concerns, to finding literally any reason to sue a competitor over patents that never should have been granted just because it can, the company simply never misses an opportunity to treat its own industry and fans poorly at the hands of its lawyers. This has even included threats to brick its customers’ consoles if they fail to agree to new EULAs after the console had been purchased.
That last one is particularly notable, as Nintendo is once again issuing a similar threat, but this time with a new EULA that outlines all the things, including legal things, that might cause Nintendo to turn your Switch or Switch 2 into a paperweight.
First spotted by Game File (readers may encounter a paywall), Nintendo has recently changed its online user agreement in multiple consumer-unfriendly ways just before the launch of the Switch 2. Chief among them: Nintendo asserts the right to render your console “permanently unusable” if it determines you’re in violation of the agreement.
Nintendo’s specific new phrasing, distinct from its prior EULA from 2021, is that “You acknowledge that if you fail to comply with the foregoing restrictions Nintendo may render the Nintendo Account Services and/or the applicable Nintendo device [emphasis mine] permanently unusable in whole or in part.”
So what might so offend the company that they would remotely disable the device you bought? Some of it is what you’d expect. Don’t circumvent its anti-piracy protections. Don’t pirate its games.
These still aren’t kosher (more on that in a moment), but then there’s this.
Publish, copy, modify, reverse engineer, lease, rent, decompile, disassemble, distribute, offer for sale, or create derivative works of any portion of the Nintendo Account Services.
The old EULA had some of this language, but it was inclusive of language that such acts had to violate local laws to be verboten. This new EULA includes no such language which, as PC Gamer rightly points out, is a pretty big problem.
The sections I most take issue with are the prohibitions on copying, modifying, or decompiling software—particularly as it no longer accounts for it being “expressly permitted by applicable law”—as well as hardware/software modifications “that would cause the Nintendo Account Services to operate other than in accordance with its documentation and intended use.”
No game or hardware modding, no extracting ROMs—something Nintendo continuously asserts we cannot do, even though it is a legally protected consumer right—and no dual booting to another OS.
Nintendo is once again asserting rights it doesn’t appear to have, at least in America. In what world can someone sell me a thing and then make the thing unusable because it doesn’t like a legal action I took with it? Do we own this fucking thing, or do we not?
Worse yet, the EULA makes it clear that Nintendo is judge, jury, and executioner on these matters. There’s nothing in the language about bricking your device that indicates Nintendo is going to go to any legal authority or third party before doing so. If it suspects you’re engaging in a forbidden (by Nintendo only) activity, the company can brick your shit.
So what happens when they’re wrong?
There’s also the very legitimate concern of the notoriously heavy-handed, litigious company acting on false positives. I don’t know what means Nintendo has to detect such activity and kill a console, but I’m getting a clear message: You spent $450 on this hardware, but Nintendo does not think you own it.
That there hasn’t been a bigger uproar over these changes is plainly absurd. They’re so anti-consumer as to be ridiculous and all of this is practically begging for interdiction from the federal government, assuming the Trump administration hasn’t hollowed out the government’s ability to protect its own people from this sort of thing.
But anyone buying a Switch 2 when its released is at risk of having an expensive paperweight otherwise. You’ve been warned.
Filed Under: bricking, eula, ownership, piracy, switch, switch 2
Companies: nintendo
Comments on “Nintendo Updates Console EULA: We’ll Brick Your Shit If We Don’t Like What You Do With It”
So, what I’m inferring is that there’s a backdoor in the Switch and Switch 2, that can not only be used to view any and all data on the console, but can remotely alter the console’s code to make it non-functional, or do who-knows-what-else.
And that it is therefore a bad idea to put any personal information on or make any financial transactions using said console, due to the risk of a bad actor gaining access to said backdoor to commit massive identity theft. Would that be correct?
Re:
It’s not really a “back” door, nor is the code “remotely” altered. Rather, the system itself will go fetch updates from a remote source. In other words, people are buying consoles that are openly hostile to them.
Re: When buying isn't owning
Then technically piracy cannot be stealing either. Didn’t big tech relearn this decades ago?
In their minds, this is probably the natural progression. We went from not owning our games to not owning our consoles.
I bought my original “Switches” to be linux consoles. But I’m less certain the switch 2 will see a exploit so soon. and at this point funneling ANY money Nintendo’s direction seems… a poor ethical choice.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Another day, another hyperbolic screed from Timmy, the boy who cried Nintendo.
Re:
Exactly, what part of this article is hyperbole?
Re:
Nintendo is taking the stance that anyone who buys a Switch 2 is buying both the console itself and a license to use that console that Nintendo can revoke at any time by bricking the console. If you think that’s ethically and morally sound, consider the idea of Tesla doing the same thing with a Cybertruck. Would you want to be in a vehicle that Tesla can brick in the middle of the road because you made a modification to the vehicle that Tesla(’s drug-addicted billionaire owner) doesn’t like?
The reason this sucks is because it takes away the idea that you, a person who might theoretically buy a Switch 2, wouldn’t fully own that console and be able to do with it as you please. Yes, Nintendo has its reasons for this move. None of them are good enough to justify it.
Re: Re:
The parent comment didn’t say anything like that. But this is just a continuation of what Nintendo’s been doing for decades. The public have spoken, and they’re totally cool with it. (I’m not.)
Re:
But there never was a Nintendo, so he shall be ignored when a wild Nintendo does appear?
Re:
Can you show us on this Mario doll where Tim touched you?
Introducing “EULA v25.1 Trump Edition”
Which means the only possibility of buying it will be if it’s fully unlocked and to be kept offline. And with Steam Deck and the likes becoming more and more available it’s even less attractive. Heck, I can emulate Switch on my computer already…
Re:
Is the Steam Deck actually available anywhere, except by ordering from Valve? But I have seen “the likes” being sold in Best Buy and similar stores: Asus, Lenovo, and MSI, at least, all have versions of this, although they all involve giving money to Microsoft which has similarly horrible licensing terms. (You wouldn’t have to use Windows, but you’d still be funding it, unlike with the Steam Deck. And while there are other non-Windows systems, they’re not so “available” either; I’ve never seen one in a store.)
Re:
And the Steam Deck can play a whole bunch of games that the Switch can’t (or can’t run well, at any rate). I’d rather have the Steam Deck than the Switch 2 at this point.
Re: Re:
“Won’t” would be more accurate. The hardware is capable of running a lot more software than Nintendo allows the “owners” to run.
Re: Re: Re:
I was speaking more in technical terms. Plenty of games that have come out in the lifetime of the Switch could never be ported to the Switch because of its hardware power (or lack thereof). Some games that were ported had to be toned down graphically to work on the Switch, and they were arguably worse off for that. The Switch 2 will be more powerful than its predecessor, but it will likely suffer the same fate: Ports of games that require powerful hardware will be kneecapped to run on the less powerful hardware of the Switch 2.
The Steam Deck hardware, by comparison, is capable of running numerous high-end games without any major kneecapping. Thanks to Steam being available, the Steam Deck also offers plenty of indie games for its library as well—many of which may not be available on either the current Switch or the Switch 2.
Between the Switch/Switch 2 and the Steam Deck, I’d rather have the Steam Deck. Nintendo’s dick moves make that choice easier with each passing day.
Re: Re: Re:2
Okay, those points are all reasonable. So now we’ve got several limitations of the Switch:
– it’s not powerful enough to run some games (especially new ones)
– it’s not open enough to run some other games (especially old ones)
– and people would be supporting Nintendo’s misbehavior by buying it
But, ultimately, we’re just some people talking on the internet. Nintendo’s decisions will be based on how the general public react. In other words, how do “dick moves” affect profits? I’m kind of with you, but I’m not optimistic.
Re: Re: Re:3
Not enough. Not yet.
But given the trend of raised prices for games, the price point for the Switch 2 (and the possibility of that price being raised because of tariffs), and the whole “we’re not selling you a game, we’re selling you an empty cart with a download code that becomes worthless when we decide to yank support” situation? Lotta people might be deciding that the Switch 2 won’t be worth their time and money.
There’s plenty of steamdeck. Devices out there this eula is against eu law pride comes before a fall. The law in japan is totally for corporations like Nintendo but people buy switch’s all over the world .no other gaming company is as aggressive as Nintendo about controlling thier IP even to the point of taking down YouTube videos by switch fans
I wonder if this runs afoul of right to repair laws…
Re:
You have no right to repair our products -Nintendo, probably
“Rights” have nothing to do with it. This is all based around copyright, which despite the name is a privilege rather than a right (that is, Congress could declare no new copyrights as of now, and the courts could do nothing).
And, come on, you know “in which world”: in this world, where you “own” this thing in the sense of paying for it but not in any way that matters. It’s easy to say that this new EULA is unacceptable, but we’ll see; most people have been accepting such terms all along, so why should Nintendo worry?
Just one of MANY anti-consumer moves Nintendo has made with the Switch 2
Let’s not forget…this is ON TOP of them selling “physical games” in the form of “key cards”, meaning you MUST download the full game in order to play it AND have their new dongle in the system to let it run. Meaning, your PURCHASED game is only able to be downloaded as long as Nintendo is supporting the service!
Also, they are charging $80 for new games (and outside the US and extra $10 for “physical” copies)…as well as $80 for Zelda: Breath of the Wild…a SEVEN YEAR OLD GAME!
Then they have the unmitigated gall to charge customers $10 for their console orientation “game” (game manual, essentially)! GREED!
On top of all that, they INTENTIONALLY avoided using “hall effect” joysticks…ensuring that this gen’s joycons will suffer from degradation and stick drift, and ensuring that millions of customers will have to fork over additional money for replacements!
When you look at everything as a whole, people are downright STUPID if they know all of this and still insist on purchasing this console! AVOID AT ALL COSTS!
Re:
That’s just it. Most people dont know about these details. They just see a console that has a lot of known family friendly titles and probably something they had growing up and so they buy it for their kids.
The additional costs dont come to light in people’s minds until after the console is purchased.
Nintendo is one of the more evil companies to grace the world.
'Nice console you got there...
There’s also the very legitimate concern of the notoriously heavy-handed, litigious company acting on false positives. I don’t know what means Nintendo has to detect such activity and kill a console, but I’m getting a clear message: You spent $450 on this hardware, but Nintendo does not think you own it.
False positives on Nintendo’s part are worrisome enough but it’s even nastier when you consider that if Nintendo can remotely and permanently brick your console that means that function is available for hackers to exploit as well, whether ‘just’ to harass people by bricking their multi-hundred dollar consoles or extortionists demanding payment to not do that.
Re:
Nintendo opening up the possibility for video game console ransomware sure as hell wasn’t on my 2025 bingo card.
Re: Re:
…and I guess still isn’t. They’re not opening that possibility in 2025, because it’s long since been opened. The original Nintendo Switch already had e-fuses, which can be used for exactly that. And the Xbox 360 had them in 2005.
Officially, those fuses are to prevent firmware “downgrades”. But, if you think about it, bricking is trivial: blow all the e-fuses such that the version has to be above 0xFFFF, for example, when the “real” version is more like 42.
In practice, though, corrupting the EEPROM or other storage would be seen as “bricking” by most people, and has been possible much longer.
Like I had said on the previous Nintendo related thread:
There is literally NO way not to agree to their EULA.
1. Keeping your Nintendo account constitutes agreement.
2. You are unable to log into your account without agreeing.
3. Their support lines (chat, text, and voice) are unable to close your account. They recommend agreeing, then deleting.
Not unusual, Sony does the same thing.
Hey, trumps insanity has everyone distracted… lets do all of that evil evil shit we thought we could never get away with!
Second hand market gonna be dicey
And many people who get their Switch bricked will resell it. It’s gonna be risky, like buying a used GPU a few years back was.
presumably you can add a DNS sinkhole to prevent the device from reporting on what you're doing
and also edit your Firefall rules to block all incoming Traffic from Nintendo and force incoming packets to null route Thus rendering communication in either Direction impossible.
Re:
You sure can. But that isn’t an option for everyone, especially if you like to play multi-player games that require Nintendo online to play.
Re:
The only way to do that is to not give it your wifi password. Once it has access to your lan, getting outside your lan is just a matter of effort.
You could turn off networking on the Switch software, or block WAN access to the switch entirely at the firewall. That works only if it doesn’t try to get around that. If it does, then you’d need to use a device whitelist on your firewall and manually whitelist other devices. And even then, it could masquerade as one of those devices if it tried to. Mac address spoofing is easy.
You could block outgoing requests to port 53 for traditional DNS and try to force everything to a server you control, but DNS-over-https is perfectly feasible and could not be blocked without blocking networking entirely. Possibly advanced packet inspection methods might allow you to identify packets which contain DNS requests, but not what they are requesting. So again, back to entirely blocking the switch. And of course, Nintendo could just hardcode IP addresses to bypass DNS.
Similarly, blocking “Nintendo” at the WAN interface is simply a game of whack-a-mole. There is no definitive list of domains or addresses controlled by Nintendo, and even if there were Nintendo could easily change them. And of course, they can always serve data from domains they don’t control. Hell, they could just publish info to a webpage, let google index it, and have the switch read the data off a google search snippet without ever visiting a nintendo server.
You either don’t give it network access to begin with, or accept the possibility it calls home.
there’s no big outrage because nintendo fans are as rabid as disney adults and will swarm you if you dare to speak ill of their chosen favorite global entertainment megacorporation. “hurt me more” is all they care to say. the average consumer is a believer looking for a cult.
I had a really alarming thought when I read this that wasn't included in the content
Even if Nintendo, could force the console to download a bricking update, presuming so, dns sinkholes would prevent that, but, ultimately, if Nintendo does this by injecting packets to induce the switch to do so, or simply toggles a switch remotely that requires injecting packets rather than simply closing an nintendo account and making it impossible to use it for things like multiplay, which not all of us really care about, depends on your taste in games, and while I have been known to enjoy a good MMORPG here and there my preference is very strongly for turn based Roleplaying games, a niche I don’t really play outside of at all, including Action RPGS which are the current trend, I don’t care for them. I find it really odd how people think turn based never presents a challenge, the truth about turn based is if you go in blind, it can eventually turn brutal towards the upper echeleons, including random encounters, believe me. I lived through it, I played Dragon warrior (quest now) in the 90s so I remmeber only too well the brutality of 3 and 4 on the N.E.S and believe me the remake does NOT capture the challenge since you have additional powers that make it a lot easier on the remake. the one problem with turn based, is that there’s often a Strategy, and once you crack it, the first time, It really rather lacks replay value at least for the battles since you already have figured it out, but, games like Octopath Traveller especially the 3rd and 4th chapter bosses reminded me that Turn based can be absolutely brutal. Some of us just like our challenges different, but if you get my point anyway I’m not so afraid of having my switch account disabled.
So my thing about Packet injecting though, is that, Packets can also be captured, and reverse engineered. And let’s say, Nintendo is sending packets to switches that force it to download a Bricking update. This is, astonishingly incompetent, as, A malicious bad actor could always use something like Wireshark or something, simpler really as Packet sniffers are a Bring your own packet sniffer kind of situation, you could even build one of your own so you’d really, deeply understand how it displayed the data.
in either event, these packets could be captured, even if it is a signal to trigger a download from a remote server to brick people’s systems.
and once, those Packets are captured, there’s effectively nothing stopping a malicious bad actor from writing a Python script on the command line that simply Takes the Input of IP address and Remote Port number, as two arguments, and once pointed at an Innocent persons Switch, All things lined up it would be possible, assuming a Firewall doesn’t get in the way or such, to Brick someone’s system, simply because they said something mean to you or, beat you in a game out of resentment. All of this assumes of course they haven’t thought of that, and only take the input from Accepted IP addreses that are whitelisted in, but this would obviously weaken Nintendo’s hands as one could simply create an access control set of rules in ones Firewall and reject all Packets from that IP Address, and this IP adress would eventually be discovered, and public information, because, Putting a Switch 2 in everyone’s home is analogous to putting the Bank vault in the Robbers house, in total privacy, eventually he’s going to find a way to break into the safe, and , Millions of people are going to have them, and a good portion of them are going to probe, and test, and tear at the system until we find it.
Re:
But don’t forget the trick used by Blu-ray players, which were designed to operate without network access: the discs may contain information revoking old keys. Similarly, game discs for the original Xbox often contained system firmware updates (apparently only installed if an “Xbox live” option was selected).
In other words, playing officially-published games will give Nintendo the power to fuck with you in unforeseeable ways.
Uh… crypto? Or a serial number in the “bricking command”? A “properly” engineered user-hostile system could easily avoid such trivial attacks.