Earlier this year, a seller in the UK secured a number of undumped GBA, DS, 3DS, Wii and Wii U ROMs and devkits from the closure of Sega's Brentford office.

In July, the seller was raided by police and the collection seized.

It is now alleged by the seller that Sega was behind this, with outlet Time Extension postulating that "Sega, when it departed its iconic Brentford HQ, will have hired someone to dispose of all the unwanted furniture and other items. Somehow, a bunch of carts, accessories and development kits were included in this, and these were legally purchased by the seller via his usual day-to-day business. Sega, realising its error, has reclaimed the kits by getting the police involved, which implies wrongdoing on behalf of the seller – something he asserts is categorically not true."

Apparently there are strict rules about returning devkits once they are no longer used, even for defunct systems.

Time Extension have reached out to Sega for clarification, and will update if they hear back.

https://www.timeextension.com/news/2025/09/sega-accused-of-using-police-to-recover-nintendo-dev-kits-it-had-negligently-disposed-of

Sega just pulled a Nintendo.

Poor form IMHO. Sega should have opened a line of dialog with the individual before engaging the legal system.

Sega may have had them stolen from them by an unscrupulous employee. "I had paid around £10,000 to a removals worker handling SEGA’s office clearance." Did the money he paid go into the pockets of the removals worker or into the pockets of Sega? It seems strange to me that the reseller would be arrested unless he was knowingly buying goods from someone who didn't actually own the consoles. 

Wait... Since they were the property of Nintendo and not Sega, then either Sega Corp was selling the consoles illegally or their employee was selling the consoles under Sega's nose illegally. The reseller should have known that dev kits are the property of Nintendo. You don't get into the high-end side of game collecting without understanding this. It's common knowledge among collectors that nobody is really supposed to own a devkit outside of a dev. 

If you read the article, they bought it legitimately.
It's Sega that stuffed up.

I quoted the part where he claims to have bought it legitimately from a removals worker. That doesn't mean that the removals worker had a right to sell it. In fact the removals worker did not have a right to sell it at all, because it was the property of Nintendo, not Sega. So he did not buy it legitimately because Sega can't sell property that it does not own. And again, as a reseller dealing in dev kits he should have known this. He was just banking on Nintendo not knowing or not caring. This is pretty much what all dev kit resellers and buyers are doing. 

The removals worker were following Segas direction. The buyer didn't sign any agreement with Nintendo nor Sega and is thus unlikely to be beholden to the same "returns" rules of Segas contract with Nintendo.

Sega is at fault. And thus litigation shouldn't be the weapon of choice here for Segas own screw up.

Let's not defend big corporations here who use their overwhelming power, influence and money to destroy the little guy rather than engage in constructive dialog to mediate an issue.

It doesn't matter if the removals worker was following Sega's direction or not. It doesn't matter if he signed an agreement with Sega or Nintendo or not. It was the property of Nintendo. Therefore, the reseller was beholden to property laws. 

How do you know that Sega's worker had been told to sell the dev kits? How do you know it was even a Sega employee that sold the dev kits and not a removals worker that worked for the scrap yard? The article doesn't prove that it was a Sega employee. It also doesn't say whether or not the removals worker was working for the scrap yard or Sega. It's possible that they were, a Sega employee but it's still an assumption at this point. It's possible that a rogue Sega worker (or scrapyard worker) sold the dev kits for their own benefit and now Sega is trying to recover them. If that were the case then Sega did nothing wrong. If Sega told one of their workers (or the scrapyard) to sell it then Sega is at fault here. But we need a credible source saying so, and not just the testimony of the accused reseller. And once again, even if Sega had told one of it's workers (or the scrapyard) to sell the dev kits the dev kits were not bought legitimately because they were never Sega's to sell in the first place. And the reseller would have known this. So it makes sense why he got arrested. 

Either way, we have two guilty parties here. They are either Sega and the reseller. Or Sega's rogue employee or the scrapyard employee or the scrapyard itself (whichever they may be) who illegally sold the items under Sega's nose, and the reseller who bought them. 

Keep in mind that Time Extension is not a very good source for information. They post articles for views first and investigate later. Also keep in mind that many resellers of videogames are unscrupulous. The number of resellers that don't test games or systems is ridiculous. I have a good relationship with a lot of local resellers because I buy up a ton of old games all the time. But I also know from talking to these resellers and from experience that a ton of resellers absolutely do not care what the law is or isn't. Half of them are legit. The other half will gladly rip you off if it means making an extra buck. 

How are you able to defend a company who screwed up, didn't send the device back to Nintendo... And thus it ends up in someone elses hands... So Sega decides to potentially destroy that persons life in order to undo their own screwup?

Where do you base your logic and empathy?

You are assuming Sega screwed up at all. Do you have proof that a Sega employee was authorized by Sega to dispose of the items or sell the items? What legal code can you quote saying, "These dev kits were the rightful property of either Sega or the scrapyard (and not Nintendo's property)?"

You are the one being illogical here by jumping to conclusions based solely on the testimony of the accused reseller. And by ignoring property laws. Let's wait until more information comes out before trying to pin the blame on Sega. As for the reseller, for the third time, he would have known full well that he was buying property that couldn't be legally sold. Again, He was buying property that he knew full well couldn't be legally sold by Sega, or the scrapyard. 

Read the article.
It was legitimately acquired. Sega was incompetent. 

Either way, we will find out when this stupid lawsuit sorts it all out or gets settled. Hopefully it doesn't ruin someones life forever.