Nintendo has officially concluded its high-profile legal battle against gaming accessory manufacturer Genki, following months of dispute over the company’s early promotion of products for the then unannounced Nintendo Switch 2. The conflict began in January 2025, when Genki showcased 3D printed mock ups of the new console at the Consumer Electronics Show (CES), even hosting its own “Genki Direct” presentation on the same day Nintendo revealed the console. Nintendo accused Genki of trademark infringement, unfair competition, and false advertising, claiming the accessory maker’s actions misled consumers into believing it had official ties to the company or early access to unreleased hardware.
According to court documents, the two parties have reached a confidential settlement. While the exact amount Genki will pay in damages remains undisclosed, the agreement includes a permanent injunction imposing strict restrictions on the company’s future marketing. Genki is now prohibited from using any Nintendo trademarks, logos, names or approximations, including “Switch,” “Switch 2,” “Joy-Con,” “Glitch,” “Glitch 2,” “Genki Direct,” and “Genki Indirect”, in connection with its products. The settlement also bans the use of specific color schemes closely associated with Nintendo’s branding, such as red and white or red and blue, in Genki’s packaging and promotional materials.
The court filing further states that Genki has attested it never obtained any unreleased Nintendo property before the Switch 2’s official reveal, despite earlier public claims suggesting otherwise. Nonetheless, Nintendo argued that Genki’s CES display and marketing created confusion among consumers and capitalized on the goodwill of the Nintendo brand. As part of the settlement, Genki must clearly identify itself as an unlicensed accessory manufacturer in all future product descriptions and advertising.
This resolution marks another legal victory for Nintendo, which has a long history of protecting its intellectual property. For Genki, the settlement means a significant rebranding effort and tighter compliance with intellectual property laws, ensuring its products remain clearly distinguished from Nintendo’s official offerings. The financial terms remain private, but the outcome sends a clear message to third party accessory makers about the risks of leveraging unreleased hardware for publicity.
