## Facts

- Atari Games Corporation applied to register the audiovisual display of its arcade game *BREAKOUT* as a copyrightable audiovisual work.
- The Register of Copyrights twice refused registration, concluding the display consisted of simple geometric shapes and coloring and lacked sufficient originality.
- The game’s audiovisual presentation included score displays, a player-controlled paddle, a moving ball, and a wall of colored rectangular bricks that disappear when struck.
- Game behavior included a speed increase when the ball passed beyond the brick wall, changes in paddle size and ball speed during play, and rebound angles determined by where the ball hit the paddle rather than by physical laws.
- After an earlier appeal required clarification of the Copyright Office’s approach, the Register again denied registration on remand; the district court upheld the denial on summary judgment.
- Atari appealed again to the D.C. Circuit, which reviewed the denial under APA “abuse of discretion” review.

## Issues

1. Whether the Register of Copyrights abused discretion by refusing to register *BREAKOUT*’s audiovisual display for lack of the minimal originality required for copyright.
2. Whether the Register permissibly evaluated the work by focusing on the unprotectability of individual component shapes and colors rather than the overall selection and arrangement.

## Decision

- The D.C. Circuit reversed the district court’s grant of summary judgment for the Register.
- The court held the refusal to register was an abuse of discretion because it was unreasonable under the Supreme Court’s directive that the creativity threshold for copyright is “extremely low.”
- The court remanded with instructions that the Register reconsider the application consistent with the proper originality standard and with evaluation of the work as a whole.

## Legal Principles

- Copyright originality requires only a “modicum” of creativity; the required level of creativity is “extremely low.”
- An audiovisual work must be assessed as a whole; an agency may not deny protection by atomizing the work into individually unprotectable elements while ignoring their overall selection, coordination, and arrangement.
- Simple geometric shapes and basic colors are not protectable per se, but their particular combination and arrangement can satisfy minimal originality.
- Although courts owe deference to the Register under APA abuse-of-discretion review, deference does not permit administrative decisions that conflict with controlling Supreme Court precedent on originality.

## Conclusion

The D.C. Circuit ruled that denying registration of *BREAKOUT*’s audiovisual display was an abuse of discretion because the Register applied an overly demanding originality assessment and failed to evaluate the work’s expressive arrangement under the extremely low creativity threshold.


Atari Games Corp. v. Oman, 979 F.2d 242 (D.C. Cir. 1992)