ESA flags retro console maker Anbernic for inclusion on US government's Notorious Market List

The Entertainment Software Association (ESA) has urged the US government to add Chinese retro handheld maker Anbernic to its Notorious Market List, claiming the company "normalises Hardware-based piracy by delivering illicit catalogues through a polished consumer product." The submission marks a notable shift in how the games industry's trade body approaches piracy, moving from websites and marketplaces to a hardware brand with a sizeable global fanbase.

Note: this article is based on the headline and description provided. Specific details beyond those, such as the filing's exact wording, are described cautiously and should be checked against the original GamesIndustry.biz report and the ESA's submission before publishing.

What the ESA Is Asking the US Government to Do

The ESA's request is part of the annual process in which the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) collects comments on markets that allegedly engage in or facilitate copyright piracy and counterfeiting. Industry groups submit names of platforms, websites and companies they believe harm their members.

By naming Anbernic, the ESA is asking officials to consider the company's products and distribution practices as part of that review. The trade body's central argument is that the devices are not merely neutral hardware but part of an ecosystem that makes unlicensed games easy to obtain.

Inclusion on the list does not itself create legal penalties. It does, however, bring public and diplomatic attention to the named entity and can encourage action by governments, platforms and retailers.

Why Anbernic Has Become a Target

Anbernic has built a strong reputation for affordable, well-designed handheld consoles that emulate classic systems. Its devices have become popular with retro gaming enthusiasts looking for portable ways to play older titles.

According to the ESA's claim, the problem lies in how some of these products are delivered to customers. The trade body alleges that illicit game catalogues are provided through a polished consumer product, giving piracy the appearance of a legitimate retail experience.

That phrase, "normalises hardware-based piracy," sits at the heart of the complaint. The ESA suggests that when a mainstream-looking device arrives ready to play unlicensed games, consumers may not recognise it as infringement at all.

The Legal Gray Area Around Emulation

Emulation itself occupies a complicated space. Emulators, the software that mimics older hardware, have generally been treated as legal in many jurisdictions, particularly when written without copying proprietary code. Court cases over the years have supported that position.

The legal issue arises with the games, known as ROMs. Distributing copyrighted titles without permission from rights holders is widely considered infringement, regardless of the age of the game or the availability of the original console.

This distinction is why the ESA's focus on preloaded or easily accessible catalogues matters. The complaint targets the supply of unlicensed games rather than the concept of retro handhelds in general.

How Preloaded Games Fuel the Concern

Many budget handheld devices have been sold with storage cards that already contain large libraries of classic games. Sometimes these are included by the manufacturer, and sometimes they are added by third-party sellers or resellers.

The ESA argues that this model turns piracy into a selling point. Buyers receive a device with hundreds or thousands of titles, often from companies such as Nintendo, Sega and Sony, without any licensing arrangement in place.

For rights holders, the concern is both financial and reputational. Unauthorised distribution can undercut official re-releases, classic collections and subscription services that rely on licensed access to back catalogues.

Industry Context: Nintendo and Other Rights Holders

The games industry has become more active in challenging piracy-related products and services in recent years. Nintendo in particular has pursued legal action against emulation-related projects and ROM distribution sites.

The ESA's move fits that broader pattern of tougher enforcement. Rather than relying solely on takedown requests, the trade body is turning to trade policy tools that can apply pressure at the international level.

Many of the products involved are manufactured and sold from outside the United States, so the Notorious Market List offers a route to raise concerns that domestic courts may struggle to address directly.

What the Notorious Market List Actually Means

The list is published by the USTR and highlights marketplaces, both physical and online, that are reported to facilitate intellectual property infringement. It is not a legal ruling, nor does it automatically lead to sanctions or bans.

Its influence comes from visibility. Being named can affect a company's relationships with payment providers, retailers and platforms, and it can prompt scrutiny from regulators in various countries.

Past entries have included major e-commerce platforms, file-sharing sites and piracy networks. Placing a consumer hardware brand in that company would be a significant signal about how seriously the industry views the issue.

Reaction From the Retro Gaming Community

The retro gaming community is likely to respond with a mix of concern and skepticism. Many enthusiasts use handheld emulators to play games they already own, or to preserve titles that are no longer commercially available.

Supporters of emulation often argue that publishers have failed to make older games accessible, and that preservation efforts fill a gap. Critics counter that this does not justify unlicensed distribution, especially when devices are sold commercially.

Fans may also worry that action against a single manufacturer could affect the wider market for retro hardware. Whether that happens will depend on how the USTR responds and whether Anbernic changes its practices.

What Happens Next for Anbernic and the Market

It remains to be seen whether the USTR will include Anbernic in its final list. The agency will weigh submissions from many industries before deciding which entities to name.

Anbernic could respond by clarifying its position, adjusting how its devices are sold, or distancing itself from third-party resellers who preload games. Any such step would likely be watched closely by both rights holders and customers.

For now, the ESA's submission underscores a growing tension between the popularity of retro gaming hardware and the rights of those who own the underlying games. The outcome could shape how emulation devices are made, marketed and sold in the years ahead.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to Contact Us