The gaming industry witnessed another high-profile legal settlement as Nintendo resolved its trademark infringement lawsuit against accessory manufacturer Genki. The dispute centered around Genki's controversial display of an unauthorized Switch 2 mockup at CES 2025, which occurred before Nintendo's official console announcement.
The CES 2025 Controversy
At the Consumer Electronics Show in January, Genki boldly showcased what it claimed was an exact replica of the then-unannounced Nintendo Switch 2. The company displayed a detailed 3D-printed mockup complete with Nintendo's logo and began promoting a range of Switch 2 accessories. This premature reveal caught significant attention from both media and consumers, but also drew immediate scrutiny from Nintendo's legal team.
The situation escalated when one of Nintendo's lawyers was spotted at Genki's CES booth. Despite initially claiming they had seen and tested a real Switch 2 unit, Genki quickly backtracked on social media, stating they did not own or possess a black market console. The company later explained that their mockup was based on leaked details rather than actual hardware access.
Timeline of Events:
- January 2025: Genki displays Switch 2 mockup at CES 2025
- January 20, 2025: Genki CEO posts controversial "ninja infiltration" tweet
- May 2025: Nintendo files lawsuit for trademark infringement
- September 2025: Settlement agreement reached and filed
Nintendo's Legal Response
Nintendo filed a comprehensive lawsuit in May, alleging trademark infringement, unfair competition, and false advertising. The gaming giant firmly denied providing Genki with any technical specifications or access to Switch 2 hardware. Nintendo's complaint suggested that Genki had either unlawfully or illicitly obtained an authentic Nintendo Switch 2 or was making compatibility claims without sufficient certainty.
The lawsuit specifically targeted Genki's marketing tactics, including provocative social media posts and product names that closely resembled Nintendo's intellectual property. Nintendo took particular issue with Genki CEO Edward Tsai's tweet showing him with fingers to his lips and the caption Genki ninjas infiltrate Nintendo Kyoto HQ, along with website pop-ups asking visitors to keep a secret.
Nintendo's Allegations:
- Trademark infringement
- Unfair competition
- False advertising
- Unauthorized use of Switch 2 branding before official announcement
- Making compatibility claims without sufficient verification
Settlement Terms and Restrictions
The legal dispute concluded with an undisclosed financial settlement paid by Genki's parent company, Human Things, to Nintendo. While the exact monetary terms remain confidential, the agreement includes a permanent injunction preventing Genki from using Nintendo's logos, designs, or confusingly similar branding elements.
Under the settlement, Genki must cease using product names like Genki Direct, Genki Glitch 2, and other approximations of Nintendo property names. However, the company retains the right to manufacture Nintendo-compatible accessories and reference the Nintendo brand, but only under nominative fair use guidelines that clearly identify Genki as an unaffiliated, unlicensed third-party manufacturer.
Settlement Details:
- Financial terms: Undisclosed amount paid by Human Things (Genki's parent company) to Nintendo
- Legal fees: Each party pays their own costs
- Permanent injunction: Prevents Genki from using Nintendo logos or similar designs
- Prohibited product names: "Genki Direct," "Genki Glitch 2," and other Nintendo IP approximations
Industry Implications
This settlement represents Nintendo's continued aggressive stance on protecting its intellectual property rights. The case follows closely after Nintendo secured a USD 2 million judgment against a Switch modder in a separate piracy case, demonstrating the company's commitment to pursuing legal action against unauthorized use of its products and branding.
The resolution serves as a cautionary tale for accessory manufacturers about the risks of premature product reveals and marketing campaigns that blur the lines between official and unofficial Nintendo products. While third-party accessory makers can continue operating in the Nintendo ecosystem, they must now navigate more carefully defined boundaries regarding branding and compatibility claims.