When Nintendo introduced the Switch 2 on June 5, 2025, people were thrilled with enthusiasm. It introduced 4K docked gameplay, a vibrant 7.9-inch 120 Hz handheld device screen, enhanced Joy-Con replacements, increased battery life, and compatibility with most unique Switch titles. But behind this boost in performance comes something far more controversial: a rigorous anti-piracy and satisfied implementation system that harms brick consoles, limits secondhand game marketplaces, and penalizes even well-intentioned users.
A New EULA With Teeth
In May 2025, just in front of the Switch 2’s debut, Nintendo revised its End User License Agreement (EULA) with a provision that astonished many consumers. This new policy granted Nintendo the legal ability to permanently disable a user’s Switch 2 console—or elements of its online services—if the device is discovered in breach of restrictions pertaining to unlicensed hardware, software, or game files.
In the United States, this means Nintendo may legally brick the console, leaving it useless. In Europe, consumer protection rules cushion the damage by forbidding outright bricking, but Nintendo may still restrict gain access to multiplayer, impair saves, eShop payments, and future upgrades. The regulation is part of Nintendo’s most severe campaign yet to tackle piracy, but its scale has many worried.
A Blow to Flash Carts and Backups
The first wave of bans came swiftly and decisively. Many of the affected users were using the MIG Switch, a flash cartridge that allows players to load game backups—often legally dumped from their own physical cartridges—onto their Switch 2. Despite users claiming these were legitimate backups, Nintendo’s system flagged them as unauthorized.
Online forums quickly filled with frustrated owners reporting that their consoles had been banned just days after launch. In many cases, they hadn’t even downloaded pirated content—just used backups of games they legally owned. Nintendo’s backend system doesn’t differentiate between a pirated ROM and a personal dump, so all backup content is treated with suspicion.
Tech publications confirmed that some bans happened just 12 days into the console’s release. Some users tried to appeal, providing proof of ownership for the games in question, and while a few were successful, most were not.
Secondhand Buyers Get Burned
Even more troubling is the impact on the secondhand console market. Buying or selling a used Switch 2 has suddenly become a risky transaction. Numerous buyers reported purchasing discounted consoles from retailers, auction sites, or third-party sellers, only to discover the system was banned from online services.
Once a console is flagged, it’s almost impossible to reverse the damage. Error code 2124-4508 has become infamous among Switch 2 users, as it indicates a ban. Even though the system still works offline, key features like multiplayer, cloud saves, and the eShop are permanently disabled.
This means someone could buy a Switch 2 that works perfectly, only to find out it’s limited or useless online because of what a previous owner did. In many cases, Nintendo has refused to lift bans even when presented with evidence that the current owner is not responsible.
International Pushback
The reaction has been particularly fierce in countries with strong consumer protection laws. In Brazil, the public agency Procon-SP accused Nintendo of violating customer rights and potentially acting unlawfully by remotely deactivating devices. The European Union’s consumer directives have also been cited as a safeguard against Nintendo’s most extreme policies.
Under EU rules, a company cannot deprive consumers of the function of a product they own—especially for something done by a previous user. As such, in many EU territories, full console bricking is illegal, and Nintendo must instead limit enforcement to online service bans.
Despite this legal cushion, many European users remain frustrated. Online bans still restrict major features, and there’s little transparency or communication from Nintendo once a ban is enforced.
Nintendo’s Detection Tactics
Nintendo uses a combination of software and server-based systems to enforce these bans. Flash cartridges like the MIG Switch are immediately flagged when plugged in, even if the user never runs pirated content. Additionally, Nintendo embeds unique identifiers in every physical game card, allowing the company to detect when the same cartridge ID is being used on multiple systems.
This detection method works well against piracy but has resulted in collateral damage. Someone playing a used cartridge could be punished if that cartridge was previously dumped and shared online by someone else. In essence, Switch 2 devices and their owners are permanently tied to the digital history of every cartridge they interact with.
Legal vs. Ethical Debate
Nintendo argues that its system is necessary to protect intellectual property and maintain fair play. But many gamers see it as overreaching and punishing honest customers for the actions of bad actors. There’s also a growing concern about the ownership model behind the policy. With this EULA, it’s clear that buyers don’t truly own their Switch 2 consoles—they’re simply leasing access to services under Nintendo’s strict conditions.
Digital ownership rights have been at the center of legal discussions for years. From movies to eBooks to video games, consumers are increasingly paying for access instead of possession. The Switch 2 situation puts this debate back into the spotlight, especially as players realize they can lose access to their devices or games even when they follow the rules.
What Players Can Do
For now, users are being advised to steer clear of all flash cartridges and third-party backup tools. Nintendo’s system leaves no room for grey areas—any non-approved content, even legitimate game backups, can result in a ban.
When buying used Switch 2 consoles, users should ask for a full verification of the device’s status, including access to online features and error-free operation. If buying online, it’s worth requesting a short video or real-time demonstration. When buying in person, have the seller log in and connect to the eShop or online multiplayer to confirm the system’s integrity.
Looking Ahead
Nintendo has not formally replied to the rising criticism, and it is still to be seen if policy will be altered. But with major news sites, tech experts, and legal authorities all chiming in, the pressure is rising.
For now, Nintendo’s robust anti-piracy drive creates a significant precedent. It sends a clear message: this generation, the firm isn’t just traveling after pirates—it’s going after the tools, the habits, and even the resale culture that has surrounded gaming for decades.
In the process, it may be redefining what it means to own a game machine. And for players who’ve grown up purchasing, selling, and sharing games freely, the Put 2 could be the time when that freedom starts to fade.