Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Nintendo DRM

Nintendo Can Render Your Switch 2 'Permanently Unusable' If You Break Their Rules (betanews.com) 136

Posted by EditorDavid from the not-playing-well-together dept.
Slashdot reader BrianFagioli writes: The new Nintendo Switch 2 is almost here. Next month, eager fans will finally be able to get their hands on the highly anticipated follow-up to the wildly popular hybrid console. But before you line up (or frantically refresh your browser for a preorder), you might want to read the fine print, because Nintendo might be able to kill your console.

Yes, really. That's not just speculation, folks. According to its newly updated user agreement, Nintendo has granted itself the right to make your Switch 2 "permanently unusable" if you break certain rules. Yes, the company might literally brick your device. Buried in the legalese is a clause that says if you try to bypass system protections, modify software, or mess with the console in a way that's not approved, Nintendo can take action. And that action could include completely disabling your system.

The exact wording makes it crystal clear: Nintendo may "render the Nintendo Account Services and/or the applicable Nintendo device permanently unusable in whole or in part...." [T]o be fair, this is probably targeted at people who reverse engineer the system or install unauthorized software — think piracy, modding, cheating, and the like. But the broad and vague nature of the language leaves a lot of room for interpretation. Who decides what qualifies as "unauthorized use"? Nintendo does.
Nintendo's verbiage says users must agree "without limitation" not to...
  • Publish, copy, modify, reverse engineer, lease, rent, decompile, disassemble, distribute, offer for sale, or create derivative works
  • Obtain, install or use any unauthorized copies of Nintendo Account Services
  • Exploit the Nintendo Account Services in any manner other than to use them in accordance with the applicable documentation and intended use [unless "otherwise expressly permitted by applicable law."]
  • Bypass, modify, decrypt, defeat, tamper with, or otherwise circumvent any of the functions or protections... including through the use of any hardware or software that would cause the Nintendo Account Services to operate other than in accordance with its documentation and intended use

"...if you fail to comply with the foregoing restrictions Nintendo may render the Nintendo Account Services and/or the applicable Nintendo device permanently unusable in whole or in part."


Nintendo Can Render Your Switch 2 'Permanently Unusable' If You Break Their Rules More | Reply

Nintendo Can Render Your Switch 2 'Permanently Unusable' If You Break Their Rules

Comments Filter:

  • Escalation in ToS (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sinij ( 911942 ) on Sunday May 11, 2025 @07:43AM (#65368225)
    Unless legislation passed to stop this practice, this will be coming to a connected TVs, cars, appliances, etc. you have. It is not a stretch to assume they would use it to prevent 'unauthorized' repairs or even blocking built-in tracking.

    • Re:Escalation in ToS (Score:5, Insightful)

      by BladeMelbourne ( 518866 ) on Sunday May 11, 2025 @08:16AM (#65368261)

      Did someone say unauthorised repairs? I think I have heard that one before.

      Doe - a deer, a Johny Deere...

      • Kind of like the shit [youtube.com]storm [youtube.com] going on with the scummy behavior of BwE (Better Way Electronics):

        Using DRM to disable customer access because his feelings got hurt.

        We need to tell companies to GTFO for those that oppose Right-to-Repair.

    • Re:Escalation in ToS (Score:5, Interesting)

      by gweihir ( 88907 ) on Sunday May 11, 2025 @08:32AM (#65368283)

      Indeed. Interestingly, the EU basically has this legislation in place. It is a bit indirect (consumers cannot sign away their rights and this may require syping illegal under the GDPR and "computer sabotage" is a crime with potential prison time), and AFAIK it has never been tested because nobody was stupid enough to try it in the EU, but chances are this would make Niontendo liable and result in personal (!) penalties for the decision makers. This could also run afoul of laws prohibiting planned obsolescence in the EU.

      The US lawmakers really need to get their thumbs out of their asses and start looking at what civilized countries do to protect their citizens. There are a lot of things that can be copied and for many there are experiences as to whether they work well and what the effects are. There really is not reason to stay in the dark ages of "fuck the consumer".

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by sinij ( 911942 )
        I agree, US lawmakers need to do more to protect consumer rights and privacy. Specifically, something like that should be on the console box, similar to cancer warning: "Manufacturer reserves the right to remotely disable this appliance".

      • Re:Escalation in ToS (Score:4)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Sunday May 11, 2025 @11:35AM (#65368573) Homepage Journal

        It's been going on in the EU for years. Microsoft and Sony will both damage your console if you break certain rules, permanently banning it from online services. Not just your account or you personally, the actual console. Given that these days online is often essential to the game, and many game purchases are online only, the console is basically useless and worthless afterwards.

        There is no appeal process. And of course they do make mistakes.

        I have heard that some people have been able to return their consoles to the retailers in the UK, but only Reddit posts so no idea if it is true or not. Legally it is a grey area because it hasn't been tested. People were able to partial or full refunds on the PS3 when Sony removed Linux support via a mandatory (to keep playing games) update, but that's a bit different. If someone did go to court it would be against the retailer, as the consumer rights make them responsible for the product, and they would have a very hard time getting Sony to assist them with detailed evidence to back up the console ban. But then again, the consumer might find it difficult to provide any evidence that they were innocent. It would probably come down to the judge and how much effort the retailer made to defend.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by gweihir ( 88907 )

          Refusing online service is different. So, no, this has _not_ "been going on in the EU for years". Details matter.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

            The argument is that the console is basically a brick without the online service, and any games that require online to work, even single player or due to DRM, stop working.

            As an example, Nintendo's new console supports cartridges, but all they do is tell the console to download the game. They don't have any game data on them. Other consoles have been that way for a while too, with discs being little more than a key. Once blocked from those online downloads, the console is useless. At best it might continue

            • Those are 'Game Key Cards' and are very clearly marked as such. There will be plenty of legit carts with full games on them that will not require talking to the internet.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by gweihir ( 88907 )

              Well, maybe. Or not. But the thing is this an indirect disable like this is much more fuzzy than a direct, intentional and announced disable. The second one does not require a proof of intent, as that one is obvious.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

                I suppose the other aspect is that "we can terminate the service with no refund for any reason we like, no appeals" is likely to be considered unfair under contract law in many EU countries.

                There are GDPR issues too as the evidence for the decision to ban would be subject to access requests, and if automated to the right to explanation or human review.

          • Refusing online service is different.

            You're forgetting the Xbox Series S is a thing. If you manage to get the console banned, it essentially does become useless.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by gweihir ( 88907 )

              Yes. But legally that "essentially" does require a court decision to establish it. A direct statement of "we will disable" in the TOS does not.

              • Microsoft's policy [xbox.com] actually is very similar to Nintendo's.

                It actually has been standard industry practice to render a gaming console useless as punishment for modding/repeated severe rule violations, for nearly as long as the manufacturers have had the capability to do so. This really just seems to be Nintendo spelling out in plain English something that was already policy, just buried deep in some click-through nobody bothers reading.

                • Re: (Score:2)

                  by gweihir ( 88907 )

                  Sure. But legally details like these matter. When the TOS state "we can fuck you whenever we feel like it", the TOS become invalid and illegal and you can sue them for the TOS before they do anything to you. But if they just effectively do it to you, you can only sue them after they have done it to you and then what _you_ did do cause this becomes quite releant. And that is the difference here.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by mjwx ( 966435 )

          I have heard that some people have been able to return their consoles to the retailers in the UK, but only Reddit posts so no idea if it is true or not. Legally it is a grey area because it hasn't been tested. People were able to partial or full refunds on the PS3 when Sony removed Linux support via a mandatory (to keep playing games) update, but that's a bit different. If someone did go to court it would be against the retailer, as the consumer rights make them responsible for the product, and they would have a very hard time getting Sony to assist them with detailed evidence to back up the console ban. But then again, the consumer might find it difficult to provide any evidence that they were innocent. It would probably come down to the judge and how much effort the retailer made to defend.

          Current consumer protections, even in the UK, do not go far enough with cases like this.

          If a company can deliberately damage or block a device from operating, especially offline then you should be entitled to a full refund regardless of age. Online services are a different kettle of fish (still abused by Sony/MS/Nintendo, which is why I remain a PC gamer despite how tempting a Switch is) but the physical device should still work as sold.

          And if not opposed now, this kind of shenanigan will be coming to

      • The US lawmakers really need to get their thumbs out of their asses

        In this case they actually don't. There's plenty of case law saying you can't remotely brick a device due to what the customer does with it. The thing is, companies can write what they want in their EULA. The proof of the pudding is in the eating (yes I know most people get this proverb wrong), which in this case means Nintendo can write what they want, but they will get FUCKED UP by the a judge if they end up in court to argue over this. /EULA: By replying to this post you agree to name your first born chi

        • I wanted to name my first child "Gotham" so when he woke up at 2am, my wife could wake me up and say "Gotham needs you."

      • The last thing the U.S. needs is to be more like the EU.

        I mean...fuck that.

      • The US lawmakers really need to get their thumbs out of their asses and start looking at what civilized countries do to protect their citizens.

        The citizens of America can easily afford to buy a new device, why would they care? The American people who can't easily buy another device, well, they are slaves and who cares what happens to them?

        Long story short, nothing is going to change.

    • Re:Escalation in ToS (Score:4, Informative)

      by larwe ( 858929 ) on Sunday May 11, 2025 @08:48AM (#65368319)
      DMCA already got us 75% of the way to this state. I'd say we're already there. Nobody owns anything if it's connected to the Internet.

    • Just don't connect your devices.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by BcNexus ( 826974 )

      To protect your rights with regards to Nintendo, I strongly urge everyone to opt out of Nintendo's mandatory, binding, forced arbitration terms. See instructions further below for how to do so.

      Mandatory binding arbitration for consumers is a scourge upon us (IMO).

      The history of companies such as-but not limited to-Wells Fargo, AT&T, and Direct TV bludgeoning consumers with arbitration terms and running roughshod over what should be our unconditional rights to be made whole for damage caused by their mal

  • Nintendo has been user hostile all along.

    Prohibiting reverse engineering under any circumstances is illegal as it conflicts with the DMCA.

    If you give them money, you're an asshole. If you can't stand up to your kids demanding you do so you're also a weakling.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Yep. I recently looked into buying a Switch and then decided that me giving money to Nintendo is not going to happen.

    • If you can't stand up to your kids demanding you do so you're also a weakling.

      To be fair though, what are the other options? Give your kids a PC and hope you've locked it down well enough that they're not playing M-rated games and watching porn? Sony's console is out of the running - they're the company that'd previously bundled literal rootkits with their content, ostensibly to protect their IP. That leaves Microsoft, a company also well known for its monopolistic and user-hostile behaviors. Plus, they'll also ban your console if you break the TOS, just like Nintendo.

      Practicing

      • That leaves Microsoft, a company also well known for its monopolistic and user-hostile behaviors

        Somehow they are least worst in consoles, unless you count Steam Deck I guess. Which now I think of it, I guess is at least close to reasonable. You can password it and lock it into gaming mode.

      • To be fair though, what are the other options?

        I struggle to understand the question. The first Nintendo Switch was released in 2017. People were just fine before that. Maybe you could formulate the question in a more precise way? The options to do what?

  • Pray they don't alter it any further. Seriously though, this is pretty fucked up. Can somebody point to any other instance of a consumer level device that can be "rendered unusable" at a whim like this?

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Ol Olsoc ( 1175323 )

      Pray they don't alter it any further. Seriously though, this is pretty fucked up. Can somebody point to any other instance of a consumer level device that can be "rendered unusable" at a whim like this?

      Windows updates.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by ElectricHellKnight ( 4011689 )
      Teslas

      • You do realize there are many car models on the road today that can be bricked by their manufacturers (or hackers thereof), right?

      • >"Teslas"

        Sorry, you will have to provide evidence that Tesla is doing that. And, how it is different than other car manufacturers, if you are plying that Teslas are somehow different. Most modern vehicles have telemetry, licenses, remote connection, service contracts, remote control, etc.

    • Cars.

      There are a number of cases where a car chase has been stopped by the car maker disabling the vehicle, even though it was without the owner's consent.

    • Hezbollah Pagers.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Alumoi ( 1321661 )

      Yes, every smart TV. One little update and all your smarts are gone, including the TV part. Isn't 'always online' fun?

    • The meat thermometer. The company decided it didn't want to support the app anymore, so now the device won't work at all (it requires the app). I complained and they sent me a gift card (yay) worth about 40% of the value of the thermometer. I'll never buy another product from this brand again (although many others are doing this garbage now too).

  • Probably a criminal act in the EU (Score:4, Interesting)

    by gweihir ( 88907 ) on Sunday May 11, 2025 @08:25AM (#65368279)

    The first thing is that they have no right and would have to replace the value, probably including the value of all the games you have. But the second is that this very likely could count as "sabotage of an IT system" and that comes with potential prison times. No, you cannot cover something like that via a click-through liense (or any kind of contract with a private individual, really) in the EU, because that is an one-sided advantage and these happen to be illegal and invalid in contracts with private individuals. Incidentally, the spying needed to enforce something like this is very likely a violation of the GDPR and hence illegal as well. And there individuals cannot sign their rights away either in the EU.

    Hence I expect that will be done in the "fuck the consumer" countries (most notably the US) only.

    • I am not a lawyer, but it sure seems like this would likely run afoul of many US state laws as well.

    • Re:Probably a criminal act in the EU (Score:5, Informative)

      by sonicmerlin ( 1505111 ) on Sunday May 11, 2025 @10:36AM (#65368497)

      This section can only be found in the US TOS. They don’t assert this right in the EU version.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gweihir ( 88907 )

        Interesting. And not unexpected at all. Thanks!

      • This section can only be found in the US TOS. They don’t assert this right in the EU version.

        Yeah but it won't pass master in the USA either. They can't remotely brick your physical device for something explicitly permitted by law (you're free to hack your device how you want).

        They are however allowed to ban you from their online services.

      • Nintendo has buildings and personnel in America...

        This is gonna be entertaining. Popcorn anyone?

    • Here's a question I was thinking though, is it criminal in the EU to have it in the TOS and/or say you'll do it and there's nothing technically illegal until they actually brick someone's device?

      I'd say it's a line of freedom of speech but also it's a type of contract so it would also be illegal to have users sign a thing that says "we can do crime to you" like the iPad South Park episode (at least without a more formal agreement).

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gweihir ( 88907 )

        That would be for the courts to decide. It could invalidate the full TOS, for example. It could even be criminal, as threatening people with something illegal can be criminal under some conditions. But apparently, the EU version does not have this in its TOS as somebody else here remarked. Which is absolutely no surprise.

  • missing phrase (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sjames ( 1099 ) on Sunday May 11, 2025 @09:22AM (#65368391) Homepage Journal

    They list any number of "grounds" to brick your device forever but the left out the key phrase "OR if we think you might have".

    You don't actually have to do any of those things, you just have to be the innocent victim of a DRM malfunction of someone's typo.

  • Same form factor, runs on Linux, you do whatever you want with the hardware, including installing a different OS if you want.
    Plus it's got way more games (comes with Steam pre installed).
    Even though some Steam games don't run on Linux yet, the ones that do are plenty.

  • legalising corporate crime is a pretty fucking stupid policy and we shouldn't be allowing it

    • And yet we not only elected a president who is a convicted felon, his party which calls itself the responsible adults in the room lets him do pretty much whatever he wants.

      So how are you going to avoid buying that?

  • So I got my new Nintendo Switch today and was hyped upon opening the box. There it was in all its NVIDIA-ized glory. As I turned it on, I was forced to agree to a utter turd of a EULA brought to effect by the DMCA, which itself was supported by the MPAA and RIAA. Oh to hell with it. This isn't even worth typing anymore in this dystopia. Besides, it's been said better before. [youtube.com]
  • What I hate about this is the "change in terms" I buy a product and have a set of terms of use. Then they change they if/whenever they want to. I have no choice but to accept if I want to continue to use the product. I can see it now, Please accept these new terms to start your car...

  • Cut off service, sure... if there's an ongoing subscription fee. Brick a physical device I BOUGHT, never. Cut off service that was promised when I BOUGHT the device... your company better have gone out of business.

    Severance of service should come with a legal requirement to provide an offline option. You kill your server, you should have to give me the ability to run my own server and connect my device to it.

    Companies literally should not have a legal option to do this kind of thing to people.

  • But nintendo never openly said they can do it. nor did microsoft or sony.
    It's a black box that obey an remote server.
    Sending an death update for a specific user is quite possible, and you can even do shit like blowing all the e-fuses and programming the firmware to just give a "you screwed up" message when this happens.

  • ...the worst tech companies on the planet, Nintendo and Apple are in a close race for gold

  • Next gen nintendo will contain a small explosive charge that can be detonated if you don't follow rules.

    • They'll probably require the charge be implanted in your neck...

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Z80a ( 971949 )

      All consoles since the PS3 i think have e-fuses, that are basically one step away from this.
      The "normal" usage of the e-fuses is to stop you from downgrading the firmware, as each firmware has an requirement for X number of e-fuses to not be blown.
      But i imagine it is trivial to burn all the e-fuses of the system and make it incompatible with any firmware but one that mocks you and run no games.

  • BS (Score:2)

    by thsths ( 31372 )

    Most terms and conditions contain some illegal stuff. They are just written to discourage users from seeking justice.

  • There is no reason why future generations should have to live with marketing consequences.
  • When is it YOUR property? You no longer Own anything nowadays, it's a "rental". You don't own your music, your movies, your games, it's "renting" it from these companies and they can take it away any time they want. /p.

  • I'm not going to try hacking first but will after someone else figures it out and willing to donate to known hackers.

  • Buried in the legalese is a clause that says if Nintendo thinks that you try to bypass system protections, modify software, or mess with the console in a way that's not approved, ...

    What sort of burden of proof does Nintendo have to meet to brick your gear?

  • If DirecTV could get away with the great H-Card massacre of 2001 that seems like plenty of adequate precedent for this to be legally acceptable.

  • If you use the switch as intended, to play silly games, and don't go about trying to "Hack it" in some way, then you won't have any problems with Nintendo.

    Seems reasonable to me.

  • If I buy something from you, then I open it up, futz around and break it (having thus voided the warranty) then fine, I'm SoL. If YOU break it, whether or not I opened it up, I get my damn money back.

    That's fair, decent, and what any reasonable person would expect, right? If you pay for something that the manufacturer takes back, you get a refund.

Slashdot Top Deals

There are two ways to write error-free programs; only the third one works.

Close