Nintendo’s legal crusade against video game piracy has taken a new and highly publicized turn with its latest lawsuit against James “Archbox” Williams, a Reddit moderator accused of selling pirated Nintendo Switch ROMs. The company is demanding a $4.5 million settlement, but insists this amount is “nowhere near” enough to cover the damage his alleged actions have caused. 
The case paints a detailed picture of how Nintendo, one of the most protective companies in gaming, continues to fight a relentless battle against digital piracy – and how one online moderator found himself in the crosshairs.
According to court documents filed in late 2024, Williams allegedly engaged in “DMCA anti-trafficking violations” by copying, distributing, and selling unauthorized copies of Nintendo Switch games through several online marketplaces and so-called “Pirate Shops.” Nintendo claims that Williams was not just a casual participant in the piracy scene but a key operator, involved in creating and maintaining the infrastructure that allowed others to download or purchase illicit ROMs. Investigators reportedly identified him through a combination of Reddit activity, repair order information, and online traces that linked his “Archbox” persona to an address in Arizona.
Back in March 2024, Nintendo says it reached out to Williams with a cease-and-desist notice, giving him an opportunity to stop the activity and cooperate. Initially, Williams acknowledged his wrongdoing and even suggested he would comply. But the relationship quickly soured. Nintendo alleges that he became combative, refused to provide written confirmation that he would stop, and denied his involvement in the pirate stores. Shortly after, several of those shops vanished from the web, and Williams allegedly deleted or hid evidence, including social media posts and his GitHub repositories.
By May, Nintendo had given him one last chance to cooperate. When that failed, the gaming giant filed its formal complaint in June 2024. The subsequent court-approved discovery phase reportedly confirmed Williams’ direct ties to the piracy operations. The 30-page legal filing accuses him of facilitating the unlawful reproduction and distribution of “hundreds of thousands” of pirated Switch games. Nintendo emphasized that it had invested enormous resources into protecting its intellectual property, citing its technical protection measures (TPMs), ongoing investigations, and global anti-piracy operations.
“NOA has been, and continues to be, damaged as a direct and proximate result of Williams’ conduct,” the company’s complaint reads. Nintendo argues that Williams’ actions were “willful,” a term that carries significant legal weight in copyright law – indicating that the accused knew exactly what he was doing was illegal but chose to continue regardless. As evidence, the company cites both his public statements and his attempts to conceal evidence.
Because Williams has not actively participated in discovery, Nintendo says it cannot precisely quantify the full extent of its losses. Nonetheless, it is asking for $150,000 in damages per infringed title – thirty in total – bringing the sum to $4.5 million. While Nintendo insists it is not seeking punitive damages or legal fees, the sheer scale of the requested compensation underscores the seriousness with which it views the case. For Nintendo, the message is clear: piracy – especially when it involves profit – will not be tolerated.
Critics and fans are sharply divided. Some see this as another example of a powerful corporation crushing a small-time individual. Others argue that Williams crossed a moral and legal line by turning piracy into a business. Even among those who sympathize with preservationists and modding communities, selling copyrighted games is seen as an unforgivable overstep. Nintendo’s reputation for taking legal action against fan projects and emulation enthusiasts only fuels debate about where enforcement ends and overreach begins.
Still, as many point out, Williams had multiple chances to avoid this outcome. Nintendo extended repeated offers for cooperation, and he allegedly ignored them. Whether he underestimated the company’s determination or believed he could outsmart it, the result now seems inevitable. If the court sides with Nintendo, the case could serve as yet another warning shot across the internet piracy landscape – a message that no matter how small your operation may seem, the gaming industry’s biggest player is always watching.
Photo by Behrouz Mehri/AFP via Getty Images