IP
AriGameplays’ “Gameboy” May Have Nintendo Switching On Its Litigation Cap

Table of Contents
When content creator Abril Abdamari Garza Alonso, better known as Mexican Twitch streamer AriGameplays, released her new song titled “Gameboy,” she may have inadvertently set off Nintendo‘s legal kill switch—though whether the gaming giant will actually level up its trademark enforcement into a full blown litigation remains to be seen. This potential controversy highlights Nintendo’s increasingly aggressive approach to protecting its intellectual property far beyond the traditional gaming space into streaming, hardware modification, and now potentially music.
The “Gameboy” Song: Real Threat or Marketing Play?
AriGameplays, released her third single titled “Gameboy” under her artist name Aria Bela on June 5, 2025. The song quickly went viral, racking up over one million YouTube views within days. However, the title references Nintendo’s iconic portable gaming console, first launched in 1989, immediately raising questions about potential trademark issues.
The song’s lyrics don’t just reference the beloved Nintendo product—they also mentioned other Nintendo properties, including the upcoming Switch 2 console. This pattern of Nintendo trademark usage could transform what might have been a purely coincidental naming of a song into a more serious legal concern.
The controversy escalated when AriGameplays posted what appeared to be an official cease-and-desist letter from Nintendo on Instagram, complete with Nintendo’s official logo and legal language. However, internet users quickly spotted signs that the document may have been digitally altered, leading many to believe the entire legal threat was fabricated as a marketing stunt.
As of June 2025, Nintendo has not issued any official statement nor confirmed any legal action against the popular Twitch streamer turned aspiring pop star. The company’s silence, combined with evidence suggesting the cease-and-desist letter was fabricated, indicates this may be more publicity stunt than genuine legal dispute.
The Legal Landscape: Does Nintendo Have a Case?
Even if the current controversy appears manufactured, the underlying legal questions are real. Legal experts analyzing the hypothetical case note several factors that could complicate any potential Nintendo enforcement action. “Gameboy” could be interpreted as generic slang for a gaming enthusiast or used metaphorically in the song’s romantic context. But when examining the music video more closely, images of green pipes, gold question mark blocks, and Tetris pieces call to mind iconic Nintendo properties like Super Mario and Tetris.
Perhaps most significantly, music and gaming operate in different commercial categories under trademark law. This separation could make it difficult for Nintendo to prove actual market confusion or damage to their brand. Historical cases, like a recent “Super Mario” dispute involving a Costa Rican supermarket, demonstrate these challenges—Costa Rica’s trademark authority ruled in favor of the grocery store in January 2025, finding that while Nintendo holds Super Mario trademarks across multiple categories, none specifically covered supermarkets or grocery stores.The ruling showed that Nintendo couldn’t prove sufficient brand recognition in Costa Rica or demonstrate the likelihood of consumer confusion between a video game franchise and a local grocery store.
However, Nintendo’s recent legal strategy suggests the company might pursue more aggressive interpretations of trademark protection, especially given the song’s explicit references to multiple Nintendo properties.
Nintendo Power-Ups its Enforcement
While AriGameplays may have dodged Nintendo’s legal team this time, the company’s recent enforcement actions demonstrate a comprehensive strategy to protect its intellectual property across multiple platforms and jurisdictions.
Streaming Crackdowns
Nintendo’s most significant recent enforcement targeted Colorado streamer Jesse Keighin, known as Every Game Guru. The lawsuit, filed in November 2024, sought over USD 7 million in damages for streaming pirated Nintendo games, including unreleased titles like “Mario & Luigi: Brothership” and “Mario Party Jamboree.” Nintendo demands USD 150,000 per copyright violation, plus USD 2,500 for each instance of emulator usage.
When Keighin failed to appear in court, Nintendo sought default judgment in April 2025, though notably requested only USD 17,500 in total damages rather than the potential USD 1.5 million maximum. This strategic restraint suggests Nintendo prioritizes establishing legal precedent over maximum financial recovery, focusing on deterrent effects across the streaming community.
Hardware Mod Enforcement
Nintendo’s enforcement has extended internationally through hardware modification prosecutions. In Japan’s first criminal conviction for Nintendo Switch modification, 58-year-old Fumihiro Otobe received a suspended two-year prison sentence and USD 3,500 fine for selling modified Switch consoles preloaded with pirated games. The international reach of this case—with Otobe arrested in one Japanese prefecture for sales occurring in another prefecture ten months earlier—demonstrates Nintendo’s comprehensive tracking and enforcement infrastructure.
Patent and Technology Protection
Beyond traditional copyright and trademark enforcement, Nintendo has expanded into patent litigation, most notably through its September 2024 lawsuit against Pocketpair over Palworld. By claiming patent infringement rather than copyright violation, Nintendo demonstrated strategic sophistication in selecting legal theories that could prove more defensible.
Nintendo’s Actions Against Streamers
Nintendo has consistently defended its intellectual property through cease-and-desist letters targeting fan games. Even content creators organizing tournaments aren’t immune—in 2023, popular YouTuber Ludwig Ahgren received a “baby cease-and-desist” from Nintendo after proposing to modify Super Smash Bros. Melee for a tournament, demonstrating Nintendo’s strict enforcement even against minor game modifications for competitive events.
Ironically, Nintendo itself was once the target of aggressive intellectual property enforcement when Universal Studios sued over Donkey Kong’s alleged similarities to King Kong. Nintendo’s victory in that case—which inspired them to name the character Kirby after their lawyer—may have shaped their current philosophy of aggressive IP protection.
Implications for Content Creators
The potential legal issues surrounding the “Gameboy” song, whether real or imagined, highlight growing challenges for content creators operating in gaming spaces. Industry experts emphasize that streamers, esports professionals, and content creators must now treat their usernames, team names, and content brands as valuable business assets requiring proactive trademark protection.
Despite the gaming industry’s massive growth, trademark protection remains underdeveloped compared to other entertainment sectors. For content creators operating across multiple platforms and jurisdictions, federal trademark protection provides crucial benefits including nationwide exclusive usage rights and enhanced protection against counterfeiting and trademark squatting.
Final Level: What’s Next?
Whether Nintendo ultimately decides to pursue legal action against AriGameplays—or whether this controversy was just an elaborate marketing ploy—the incident illustrates how intellectual property law intersects with gaming culture, music, streaming, and content creation in unprecedented ways.
Nintendo’s recent litigious enforcement approach across streaming, hardware modification, and patent protection suggests that content creators working in gaming-related spaces must navigate intellectual property considerations with increasing sophistication. As Nintendo continues switching on its litigation capabilities, the gaming industry’s legal landscape will only become more complex, requiring content creators to think strategically about trademark risks before hitting “publish” on their next viral creation.