Customers should get the refunds as this is business already transacted. Nintendo should get a "loss of potential sales" award due to it being priced out for many consumers, due to the tariffs. How that number would be determined is best left to people smarter than me.
this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2026
739 points (99.9% liked)
Technology
84019 readers
3501 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I'm curious to see how this will go.
My guess is: When the products were sold, the price was simply higher and the tariffs not mentioned on the invoices. Customer did not pay taxes themselves, they agreed to pay a high price. Of course everyone knew why, but I doubt a capitalistic country like the US will rule in favor of the customers here, unfortunately.
We should do a blanket class action lawsuit against all corporations throughout history, demanding all the wages they owe, refunds for the prices they gouged, and the artificially created inflation.
Or they could settle by paying for worldwide universal healthcare and UBI.
Let’s see more of this.
How exactly was Nintendo unjustly enriching themselves. Sure it’s morally wrong. But legally? Nintendo is free to raise their prices, tariffs or no tariffs, it’s not price gouging since Nintendo products aren’t essential goods. And people are free to buy their products or not buy. That the government wants to give them a bag of money is a different matter from the price hike, if they want to sue someone sue the government.
That the government wants to give them a bag of money is a different matter from the price hike
It is not. They raised the prices precisely when the tariffs went into effect. There is no other plausible explanation as to the reason for the hike. You are licking corporate boot.
Just because something is legal that doesn't make it just.
Like everything else Trump does this too was a grift by him to funnel money to the rich. He should be a part of this law suit.
He's criminally protected from any official acts while in office, remember?
(A Supreme Court decision made during Biden's term, it should be noted - he was also criminally protected from any consequences of his official acts as president, and they specifically gave the example of a president using Seal Team Six to assassinate their political rivals. Biden didn't even try using that power against Trump in any way. Assassination was probably off the table lmao but he could've done extrajudicial surveillance or such. He didn't, because they're all owned by the same oligarchs and Zionazis.)
And a civil lawsuit would be paid by... the taxpayers.
You don't get to win when the other side makes the rules. You have to stop playing the game, or get as close as you can.
He's not protected from things moving towards him at terminal velocity. That's the other solution.
I get what you're saying, but it's gonna bug me if I don't point out that the only direction you can achieve terminal velocity in is down. It's the maximum speed something can achieve by just falling
nice try glowie. (is that still ok to call fbi agents, or has the right coopted Terry’s terms?)
Nice try FBI handler
I think it's presumptuous to assume that the increase in prices that just happened to be identical to the tarrifs had anything to do with the tarrifs.
Nintendo: you know what? Fuck you. Our prices just went up for you. Games are $120 now. Fuck you, you'll still buy our pokemon slop we spent 0 effort making. Mario? Yep, $120, but now when he jumps he says "fucka youuuu!" You'll still buy it, because Mario.
You reminded me of a b rated movie about some old coots in NY. There's a kid who says that to anything anyone says to him.
I've been ootl on Pokemon since y/x, and even was barely paying attention before someone else bought it for me. But the shit I saw when sword shield(? First switch title) was wild. They really were just phoning it in, and people still bought everything else they dropped! The only reason I got a switch was for prime 4, and likely won't be getting a switch 2. Sucks watching my nostalgia be abused in real time.
You can still enjoy the games you are nostalgic for with emulators.
I love how nintendo are switching our youths back towards old school tactics. Emulators and piracy are having their renaissance.
Never left for me. 😎
I got tired of the new games being shit and/or not done when. I think last game I bought new was No Man's Sky (yes I know, its decent now, I still play it sometimes), after that disappointment I just gave up. I haven't been paying attention on whats coming, whats the newest big game.. I just play emulators. I play the games that I wanted to play when I was a kid, but couldn't. My gaming journey started with Amiga 500, then I got a NES, after that a Game Gear, then a Play Station 1. So I've been gaming a lot of SNES stuff lately, I downloaded a bunch of Atari titles. Sega games are next on the list.
Theres so much to play, I will die before I run out of stuff. I think I'll never buy a new game ever again.
load more comments
(1 replies)
They can say that in the future but as far as this suit goes, didn't they already say, "Don't blame us, the prices are going up because of tariffs"?
True, I was just making a joke about Nintendos response to the people in the article suing for a refund of the tarrif price increase.
Friendly reminder that the Boston Tea Party was about tariffs. We know what works.
not sure if this also works for self-imposed tarrifs.
They're not "self-imposed" if they're illegally imposed by a tyrant.
load more comments
(8 replies)
What is the logic behind giving a company money for the tariffs? The costs were invariably passed to the consumer, so how does paying the company make any sense?
i guess it only makes sense in the maga world. if i was in nintendos shoes, i would have done the same. who knows when tariffs change yet again, the tariff compensation is withdrawn or whatever the fuck. the trump administration flip-flops all over the place so fuck em.
The logic was “these companies ate the cost” and when confronted with the fact that prices went up and the costs had been passed on to consumers, the clarification they provided was “nuh uh”.
load more comments
(5 replies)
load more comments
(28 replies)
view more: next ›