Artic argued that the games cannot be protected as audiovisual works as they are not fixed. The court acknowledged that the framers of the Copyright Act did not anticipate the issues raised by electronic games, but rejected Artic's arguments.
Artic claimed that video games should not be considered copyrighted material because they aren't fixed in a tangible form. The court agreed with this assessment, acknowledging that the original copyright law was written before the advent of digital games and therefore didn't address these new challenges.