## Facts

- Midway Manufacturing Co. produced the arcade video games *Pac-Man* and *Galaxian*; Coleco Industries held a license to make and sell authorized handheld versions.
- Bandai entities and related distributors sold low-cost handheld electronic games, including a handheld game titled **Galaxian** and another titled **Packri Monster**.
- Midway and Coleco sued for federal copyright and trademark infringement and related unfair competition.
- The court previously entered preliminary injunctive relief restricting distribution of Bandai’s handheld **Galaxian**.
- Bandai challenged the validity of Midway’s copyright registrations, arguing the Copyright Office did not meaningfully examine originality.
- On infringement, Midway asserted Bandai copied protected audiovisual content from Midway’s games; Bandai argued similarities were limited to unprotectable game concepts and possibly preexisting mechanical figures.

## Issues

1. Whether Midway’s copyright registrations were invalid because the Copyright Office allegedly failed to conduct a substantive originality examination.
2. Whether summary judgment was proper on copyright infringement, including whether an ordinary observer would find substantial similarity and whether copying derived from preexisting mechanical figures.
3. Whether Bandai’s use of the identical mark **Galaxian** for a handheld video game was likely to cause consumer confusion as a matter of law.
4. Whether **Packri Monster** was confusingly similar to **Pac-Man** as a matter of law or required factfinding.

## Decision

- The court held that copyright registrations were not invalid merely because the Copyright Office did not conduct a searching originality review.
- The court denied summary judgment on copyright infringement due to genuine disputes of material fact on substantial similarity and the source of any copying.
- The court granted summary judgment for Midway on trademark infringement for **Galaxian**, finding likelihood of confusion established as a matter of law given the identical mark used on closely related goods.
- The court denied summary judgment on the **Pac-Man**/**Packri Monster** trademark claim because likelihood of confusion turned on disputed facts.

## Legal Principles

- Copyright protection for video games extends to protectable audiovisual expression, not to the general game concept; the idea–expression distinction limits any claim to the particular expressive display.
- A copyright registration is not rendered invalid solely by an asserted lack of substantive originality examination by the Copyright Office; challenges to originality must be litigated on the merits.
- Copyright infringement of audiovisual works commonly turns on the ordinary observer standard for substantial similarity, a fact-intensive inquiry often unsuitable for summary judgment when the record is disputed.
- Trademark infringement may be resolved as a matter of law where an identical mark is used on closely related products and the evidence supports likely consumer confusion.
- When marks are not identical, likelihood of confusion generally requires factfinding about marketplace context and consumer perception.

## Conclusion

The court sustained the legal force of Midway’s copyright registrations, entered judgment that Bandai’s handheld **Galaxian** infringed Midway’s **Galaxian** trademark, and reserved for trial the disputed questions of copyright infringement and whether **Packri Monster** was confusingly similar to **Pac-Man**.


Midway Mfg. Co. v. Bandai-Am., Inc., 546 F. Supp. 125 (D.N.J. 1982)