Hardware Mig Switch on Switch 2

[Skelletonike]

they essentially are bricking it though because most switch 2 carts need eshop downloads so you cant just buy a game ad play it anymore, basically turns the console into a switch 1 lol

They do not need eshop downloads. Only if you buy a code, but that's on you. Game Key Cards automatically asks to download the game.

A lot of other systems do the same and there's nothing wrong with it, games will work the same offline. The rest are "benefits"that you've willingly "rescinded" by doing something ban worthy.

 

[dovahkiing]

The legal/regulatory discussion is frankly academic and pointless at this stage, as any actions like that will take years to resolve.

I’d be more interested in a questionnaire or survey to clarify exactly which action(s) all the banned users have in common. Was it trying (and failing) to use the Mig pre firmware 1.2, or was it interacting with NSO servers (either to update game or play online) while running a game backup off the Mig?

 

[Inaki]

A service agreement differs from a software licence; it governs access to ongoing services, not just a product you buy once. While a licence covers how you can use purchased software, a service allows companies like Nintendo to control your continued access to features like online services or system updates.

This gives them broad discretion; if you breach their service agreement, even in ways that might be legally permissible under copyright law, they can revoke access. You may have the legal right to dump and back up your games, but using that copy outside Nintendo's approved ecosystem (Such as the Mig Switch) is not permitted.

It's my understanding that this is the case throughout the US, the UK, and the EU.

In short, it might be legal for you to play backups, but it's also legal for Nintendo to revoke your access to their service for doing it.

What people doesn't understand is that even if you sign or agree to any sort of contract with consumer goods, none of the signing parts, not nintendo nor you as a customer have the last say about anything signed. It is the actual consumer goods laws and norms the ones that apply, ALWAYS.

Plus, as @linuxares implies, the thing is normally judged by loss of functionality and reasoning about why/if that loss of functionality is actually required to protect both sides. For example, banning online PLAY from potentially cheating customers ( in CFW case, but let's assume a common minimum denominator here for MiG ) is a good argument for nintendo because cheating breaks the quality of the online play. But banning against being able to buy more goods or doing updates does nothing to help nintendo nor resolves anything.

So, if a big lawsuit happened, ( let aside potential lobbying of nintendo and others, which is an external but very real problem in the EU and others ) under normal circumstances, nintendo would probably be forced to split online services into online PLAY/chat/... vs online updates/purchases and then give the later part of such services to banned customers.

 

[Inaki]

The legal/regulatory discussion is frankly academic and pointless at this stage, as any actions like that will take years to resolve.

I’d be more interested in a questionnaire or survey to clarify exactly which action(s) all the banned users have in common. Was it trying (and failing) to use the Mig pre firmware 1.2, or was it interacting with NSO servers (either to update game or play online) while running a game backup off the Mig?

Yes, they may take years, but would probably have big economic and image impact for nintendo. Even more so, for the future, it would set precedent for nintendo and others to be careful not to abuse customers, probably with big sanctions to come if the abuse is repeated.

 

[Inaki]

I think I lost a braincell watching that

Honestly, he is quite right when it comes to nintendo being that anticonsumer. Everything that comes for the switch 2... will be fine

 

[franky0815]

I think everyone who is currently using or planning to use the MIG is aware that they will get banned. And to be honest, if you don't play online, it doesn't matter whether the console is banned or not.

The big problem with such console bans though, is that an uninvolved person might end up with a banned console.
for example: if they buy a used game on eBay that was dumped using a MIG dumper, and then both copies are online at the same time your switch will get a ban, and as a normal customer you are fucked

 

[twatsandwich]

The big problem with such console bans though, is that an uninvolved person might end up with a banned console.
for example: if they buy a used game on eBay that was dumped using a MIG dumper, and then both copies are online at the same time your switch will get a ban, and as a normal customer you are fucked

Have we seen examples of this actually happening though? I've heard people talk about these concerns - but honestly I'd expect Nintendo to be smarter about which consoles they choose to ban.

Have we seen this happen with the Switch 1 at all?

 

[Locutus73]

looks like nintendo is also banning switch2 consoles that never saw any insertion of a mig switch
if its true, this guy putting in the mig switch never in his switch2, but in a switch1 thats using the same nintendo account on both consoles

I asked the guy on YT and he realized he used his legit copy of Link's Awakening on his Switch 2 while the same game was loaded in his MIG Flash in his docked Switch 1... two istances of the same cart Id at the same time... honestly I'd expect his Switch 1 to be banned too.

 

[Inaki]

I think everyone who is currently using or planning to use the MIG is aware that they will get banned. And to be honest, if you don't play online, it doesn't matter whether the console is banned or not.

The big problem with such console bans though, is that an uninvolved person might end up with a banned console.
for example: if they buy a used game on eBay that was dumped using a MIG dumper, and then both copies are online at the same time your switch will get a ban, and as a normal customer you are fucked

I and many of us don't play online but for purchasing things or downloading key cart based games or updates, we should be able to do those even if banned, so yes, it matters.

 

[AshWeststar]

What people doesn't understand is that even if you sign or agree to any sort of contract with consumer goods, none of the signing parts, not nintendo nor you as a customer have the last say about anything signed. It is the actual consumer goods laws and norms the ones that apply, ALWAYS.

Absolutely.

But banning against being able to buy more goods or doing updates does nothing to help nintendo nor resolves anything.

Nintendo appears to be banning the "compromised" device rather than the individual who used it. This would probably be viewed more favourably than banning individuals within the UK and EU by regulators.

So, if a big lawsuit happened, ( let aside potential lobbying of nintendo and others, which is an external but very real problem in the EU and others ) under normal circumstances, nintendo would probably be made to split online services into online PLAY/chat/... vs online updates/purchases and then given the later part of such services to banned customers.

The Unfair Contract Terms Directive (93/13/EEC) requires termination clauses to be fair, and a study (section 2.5) on digital services indicates that termination for significant breaches, like piracy, is generally permissible. Nintendo's bans are implemented at the console level, affecting all online access and not individual accounts, which could be a problem if access to digital entitlements is lost. Courts are unlikely to mandate splitting services, as existing regulations do not support this. Furthermore, Nintendo does not deny access to purchased digital goods to the user, which would be the point of contention. They are revoking access to a specific device.

 

[dovahkiing]

Yes, they may take years, but would probably have big economic and image impact for nintendo. Even more so, for the future, it would set precedent for nintendo and others to be careful not to abuse customers, probably with big sanctions to come if the abuse is repeated.

I don’t really disagree much - but at this point in time I am not sure there’s much utility to that discussion here.

More useful and interesting is figuring out under what circumstances folks are getting banned in order to

a. prevent more bans
b. learn about NS2 and Mig interactions

 

[zajebanosaurus]

I don’t really disagree much - but at this point in time I am not sure there’s much utility to that discussion here.

More useful and interesting is figuring out under what circumstances folks are getting banned in order to

a. prevent more bans
b. learn about NS2 and Mig interactions

The discussion is related, it just topic that expanded. We have some answers and I am sure it we will have some more

 

[Reecey2]

I don't understand your problem, but I find it cheeky to accuse me of using something I don't even have. Who said I have a MIG Switch? I only described how to update from Switch 1 to Switch 2, and I can only shake my head at that

sorry the comment wasn’t directly intended for you it was meant for anyone buying a brand new Switch 2 and using a Mig card in it specifically after Nintendo released their brand new terms and conditions not so long ago stating any modifications used will result in a complete unit ban

 

[dolpf]

God, aren't you all tired of repeating about the blocking like parrots? Is there at least one proof of this blocking? Nintendo will never completely block the console. By changing the user rules, Nintendo simply insured themselves. All they are capable of is bans.

 

[Reecey2]

God, aren't you all tired of repeating about the blocking like parrots? Is there at least one proof of this blocking? Nintendo will never completely block the console. By changing the user rules, Nintendo simply insured themselves. All they are capable of is bans.

Unfortunately Nintendo updated their new terms and conditions not so long ago just before the Switch 2 was released and it says clearly any modifications used on the system will result in a complete ban. Read them

 

[Inaki]

Absolutely.



Nintendo appears to be banning the "compromised" device rather than the individual who used it. This would probably be viewed more favourably than banning individuals within the UK and EU by regulators.



The Unfair Contract Terms Directive (93/13/EEC) requires termination clauses to be fair, and a study (section 2.5) on digital services indicates that termination for significant breaches, like piracy, is generally permissible. Nintendo's bans are implemented at the console level, affecting all online access and not individual accounts, which could be a problem if access to digital entitlements is lost. Courts are unlikely to mandate splitting services, as existing regulations do not support this. Furthermore, Nintendo does not deny access to purchased digital goods to the user, which would be the point of contention. They are revoking access to a specific device.

They are unnecessarily crippling the Switch 2 functionality, there's no way around that.

 

[dolpf]

Unfortunately Nintendo updated their new terms and conditions not so long ago just before the Switch 2 was released and it says clearly any modifications used on the system will result in a complete ban. Read them

How old are you to believe this? I repeat, these changes are made for Nintendo's legal protection. There will never be any real console blocking. There will only be bans, as always.

 

[Inaki]

Unfortunately Nintendo updated their new terms and conditions not so long ago just before the Switch 2 was released and it says clearly any modifications used on the system will result in a complete ban. Read them

That matters nothing in most of the West.

 

[l7777]

you sure about this i tested 2 games on my unupodated model and both said i need a sys update i debated doing it idk if i should leave the console or 19 or update to 20 while its still possible

Can't confirm those games, but I can 100% confirm that TOTK and BOTW will not launch from a Switch 1 cartridge without game specific updates that are NOT the Switch 2 Enhanced versions even on 20.1.1.

 

[Inaki]

God, aren't you all tired of repeating about the blocking like parrots? Is there at least one proof of this blocking? Nintendo will never completely block the console. By changing the user rules, Nintendo simply insured themselves. All they are capable of is bans.

However, this type of ban is quite crippling, I don't know if there would be a case for them in court. But yes, knowing the ifs/hows/whens/whys of MiG in Switch would be more usable right now.