## Facts

- Atari Games Corp., successor to the creator of the 1975 coin-operated video game BREAKOUT, sought copyright registration for the game as an audiovisual work.
- BREAKOUT displays colored rows of rectangular “bricks,” a player-controlled rectangular “paddle,” and a square “ball”; bricks disappear upon contact and scoring increases, with additional effects when the ball penetrates the wall.
- The game also includes simple tones and sound effects that change during play.
- The Register of Copyrights, through the Copyright Office, issued a final refusal to register, concluding the work lacked sufficient original visual or musical authorship.
- Office reviewers reasoned that the visuals used common geometric shapes and simple color layering, the sounds were too simple to qualify as musical authorship, and gameplay depended on player interaction.
- Atari sought reconsideration multiple times, but the refusal was maintained.
- Atari sought APA review in federal district court; the court granted summary judgment for the Register.
- Atari appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the Register’s refusal to register the game was supported by reasoned decisionmaking under the APA’s “arbitrary or capricious” standard.
2. Whether the Register improperly evaluated originality by dissecting the game into unprotectable elements rather than assessing the audiovisual work as a whole.

## Decision

- The court vacated the district court’s summary judgment for the Register.
- The court remanded with instructions that the matter be returned to the Copyright Office for further consideration.
- The court held that the Office did not intelligibly explain why the work lacked the minimal originality required for copyright, preventing meaningful APA review.
- The court did not order registration, but required the agency to articulate a coherent explanation consistent with copyright originality standards.

## Legal Principles

- Under the APA, agency action must reflect reasoned decisionmaking; the agency must explain its conclusions sufficiently to permit judicial review for arbitrariness or caprice.
- Copyright originality requires only a minimal degree of creativity; a work may qualify even if composed of simple or commonplace components.
- Originality analysis must consider the work’s overall selection, coordination, and arrangement, not merely whether each individual element (e.g., geometric shapes or simple tones) is independently protectable.

## Conclusion

The D.C. Circuit required the Register to reconsider and adequately explain the denial of registration for a video game, emphasizing that APA review demands an intelligible rationale and that originality must be assessed based on the audiovisual work’s overall expressive arrangement rather than isolated, individually unprotectable elements.


Atari Games Corp. v. Oman, 888 F.2d 878 (D.C. Cir. 1989)