Affiliate disclosure: This guide contains affiliate links. As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases at no extra cost to you. Learn more.
2026-10-17 · Industry analysis
Affiliate disclosure: This article contains affiliate links. As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases at no extra cost to you. Learn more.
In mid October 2026, a filing from the Entertainment Software Association became public. The ESA, the trade body that represents Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft and most of the US games industry, asked the Office of the US Trade Representative to add Anbernic's official store to its Notorious Markets report.
The language in the filing is strong. It calls handhelds sold with preloaded games "the functional equivalent of superfakes," a term borrowed from the world of high quality counterfeit luxury goods.
Coverage moved fast, and some of it overshot. Headlines appeared saying Anbernic "could face a potential US sales ban." That is not what this is, and the list in question has no power to impose one.
The real situation is less dramatic and more interesting. Here is what the ESA filed, what the Notorious Markets list actually does, and the one detail in the complaint that explains why Anbernic got named and the rest of the handheld industry did not.
The Short Version
- The ESA nominated anbernic.com, the brand's official store, for inclusion on the US Trade Representative's Notorious Markets report.
- The complaint is about preloaded memory cards, not about emulation hardware or emulator software.
- The filing went in before 7 October 2026, when the public comment period closed. It became public around 13 October.
- The Notorious Markets list has no direct legal power. It cannot ban imports or sales, and the USTR states it is not a finding of any legal violation.
- It still carries real consequences, just indirect ones: payment processors, ad networks and marketplaces respond to it.
- Reports of an imminent US sales ban are wrong. No such mechanism is in play.
- Nothing about this is retroactive. A handheld you already own is unaffected.
- Other brands were not named, and the reason comes down to what ships in the box.
What the ESA Actually Filed
Every year the USTR publishes the Notorious Markets report. It is a list of online and physical marketplaces that the US government says facilitate large scale copyright piracy or trademark counterfeiting. Industry groups nominate candidates during an open comment period, and the 2026 window closed on 7 October.
The ESA used its submission to nominate a category it had not pushed this hard before: retro handhelds that arrive with games already on them.
It named anbernic.com, the official store of the Shenzhen based manufacturer that has been selling emulation handhelds since 2017. The filing describes the devices as "routinely offered or shipped with removable memory cards preloaded with hundreds or thousands of unauthorized copies of copyright-protected video game" software.
The core of the argument is the superfake comparison. The ESA says these products "present visually and commercially to consumers as legitimate devices," and that the preloading is what makes them a piracy product rather than a hardware product. It adds that the practice "removes the technical friction that once separated mainstream consumers from video game piracy."
The filing also raises a security angle, warning that software on such devices "could purposely include malware facilitated by organised criminal syndicates, terrorist groups, or nefarious state actors." That is a notably escalatory line for a copyright submission, and it is the kind of language trade filings use when the goal is attention.
Anbernic was not the only nomination. The ESA also pointed the USTR at torrent and piracy coordination sites, game crackers and repackers, commercial cheat sellers and unauthorized digital goods marketplaces. The handheld nomination is the part that is new.
One more detail worth flagging: the ESA specifically cited Amazon as a channel where these handhelds can be bought easily, arguing that mainstream retail availability lends them a false air of legitimacy.
What the Notorious Markets List Is
The USTR has published this report since 2006, as a companion to its annual Special 301 review of intellectual property protection worldwide.
It is a naming exercise. The USTR gathers nominations from rights holder groups, selects examples, publishes them, and encourages the relevant national authorities to step up enforcement. Past editions have listed large file sharing sites, streaming operations, and physical markets in various countries.
That is the whole mechanism. A list, published annually, with commentary.
What It Cannot Do
This is where the coverage went sideways, so it is worth being precise.
The list cannot ban a product from sale in the United States. It has no such authority. It is a report, not a regulation and not a court order.
The list cannot block imports. Import exclusion is a different process entirely, run through other agencies and requiring an actual legal finding.
Inclusion is not a finding that anyone broke the law. The USTR says this itself. Its standing disclaimer is that the list does not constitute a finding of a legal violation, and that it does not directly form national trade policy.
A nomination is not an inclusion. The ESA asked. The USTR has not decided. Nominations are routinely filed and not acted on.
So "Anbernic could be banned from selling in the US" is a reasonable thing to worry about in the abstract and not a thing this filing can cause. Outlets that framed it that way compressed several steps that do not exist.
What It Can Actually Do
None of which means the filing is harmless. The Notorious Markets list has real teeth, they are just indirect.
Entities that land on it have historically faced:
- Payment processor pressure. Card networks and processors use the list when deciding who to stop serving. For a direct to consumer store, losing card processing is close to fatal.
- Ad network delisting. Advertising platforms treat listed entities as ineligible.
- Marketplace removal. This is the one that matters most here. Large retailers watch the list, and the ESA explicitly named Amazon as a channel of concern. A marketplace deciding on its own to delist a seller requires no government action at all.
- Diplomatic pressure on the country where the entity operates, which can turn into enforcement action locally.
That last cluster is the realistic risk. Not a ban, but a quiet narrowing of where you can buy the hardware, and a chilling effect on retailers who would rather not be in a filing next year.
The Complaint Is About the SD Card, Not the Hardware
Here is the detail that explains everything, and almost nobody covering this story led with it.
The ESA did not ask the USTR to list emulation. It did not ask it to list emulators, or custom firmware, or handheld manufacturers as a class. It named one company's store, and the stated reason was the memory card that ships inside the box.
That distinction holds up legally. Emulator software is lawful, and courts have said so. Custom firmware like ArkOS, muOS and KNULLI is lawful. Owning a handheld is lawful. A microSD card containing thousands of commercial games that nobody bought is not, and that is true whether it ships from a factory or a third party seller.
Which is why this did not touch the rest of the industry. Compare AYN, whose Odin 3 product page states plainly that "there are no games preinstalled." Retroid ships empty cards too. Neither was named. The brands that sell hardware and let you supply your own software are not in the filing, because there was nothing to put in it.
Anbernic's situation is messier, and it is worth being fair about why. Anbernic sells a huge number of models through a sprawling network of regional stores, resellers and marketplace listings, and the preloaded card has long been a selling point used by some of those sellers. Whether every instance traces back to the manufacturer or to intermediaries is exactly the kind of thing a USTR review would have to untangle. The ESA's filing targets the official store, which is the strongest version of the claim and the one Anbernic would most want to contest.
For what it is worth, our position on this has not changed and does not depend on the filing. We cover emulators, firmware and hardware. We write about playing games you own and about preservation. We do not link to ROM sites, we do not explain where to get games, and we never have. If you want the longer version of where the law sits, our emulation legal status guide covers it.
What This Means If You Own or Want an Anbernic
Practical answers, because the headlines have been alarming and the reality is calm.
Your handheld keeps working. Nothing here reaches onto a device you already own. There is no remote switch, no update that disables anything, and nothing retroactive.
You can still buy Anbernic hardware. No restriction exists today, and none follows automatically from a nomination.
Buy the bare device. This was already the right call and it is more clearly right now. A listing that advertises thousands of included games is the exact thing the ESA filed about, and it is also usually a sign of a reseller rather than the manufacturer. Buy the hardware, bring your own games.
Expect nothing to happen quickly. The USTR reviews submissions and publishes its report on its own schedule, typically months after the comment window closes. There is no deadline looming.
Watch the retailers, not the government. If this story has a practical consequence for buyers, the first sign will be listings quietly disappearing from a marketplace, not an announcement from Washington.
We will update this page when the USTR publishes its 2026 report or if Anbernic responds publicly.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Anbernic banned in the US?
No. The ESA asked the US Trade Representative to include anbernic.com on its Notorious Markets report. That is a nomination, not a ban, and the list itself has no authority to ban sales or block imports. No restriction on buying Anbernic hardware exists.
What is the USTR Notorious Markets list?
An annual US government report, published since 2006, naming online and physical marketplaces that rights holders say facilitate large scale piracy or counterfeiting. Industry groups nominate candidates each year. The USTR states that inclusion is not a finding of a legal violation and does not directly set trade policy.
Why did the ESA target Anbernic specifically?
Because of the preloaded memory cards. The filing describes Anbernic devices as routinely shipped with removable cards holding hundreds or thousands of unauthorized game copies, and argues that this is what makes them a piracy product rather than just hardware. Manufacturers that ship empty storage were not named.
Does this make emulators illegal?
No. The filing does not target emulator software, custom firmware or emulation as a practice. Emulator software is legal and this changes nothing about that. The complaint concerns copies of commercial games distributed with hardware.
Will my Anbernic handheld stop working?
No. Nothing in this filing reaches a device that already exists. There is no mechanism to disable hardware you own, and the process in question is a trade report rather than an enforcement action.
What could actually happen to Anbernic?
If the USTR did list the store, the realistic effects are indirect: payment processors declining to work with it, ad networks delisting it, and retailers choosing to drop listings. The ESA named Amazon as a channel of concern, and a marketplace can delist a seller without any government involvement at all.
When will the USTR decide?
There is no announced date. The comment period closed on 7 October 2026 and the USTR publishes its report on its own timeline, usually some months later. A nomination does not guarantee inclusion.
Should I avoid buying an Anbernic handheld now?
There is no legal reason to. If you want one, buy the device on its own rather than a listing advertising thousands of preinstalled games. That was already the better purchase, since preloaded listings usually come from resellers, and it keeps you well clear of the thing this filing is actually about.
Related Reading
Related reading
GuideGuideGuide