September 1st, 2025
The Second Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) has unanimously ruled that works autonomously generated by artificial intelligence (AI) are not eligible for copyright protection under Mexican law.
The case originated in 2024, when a citizen submitted a request to the National Copyright Institute to register a digital work titled Virtual Avatar, created using the AI platform Leonardo. The request was denied based on the Federal Copyright Law (LFDA), which stipulates that only human creations can be recognized as protected works, as they must reflect originality and embody the author’s individuality and personality.
Following the rejection, the applicant challenged the decision before the Specialized Intellectual Property Chamber of the Federal Court of Administrative Justice (TFJA), arguing that excluding AI-generated works restricts creativity to the human domain and violates principles of equality, non-discrimination, and legal certainty. The challenge also cited international treaties to which Mexico is a party, including the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) and the Berne Convention.
The TFJA upheld the rejection, prompting the applicant to file an amparo lawsuit before the Federal Judiciary. The Second Chamber of the SCJN took up the case and ultimately denied the amparo, reaffirming that works created solely by AI do not meet the originality requirements established under Mexican law.
Key Findings of the SCJN Decision:
- Copyright is a human right exclusive to natural persons, derived from their creativity, intellect, emotions, and lived experiences.
- Works produced solely by AI systems lack personal expression, a fundamental requirement for legal protection.
- Neither the Berne Convention nor the USMCA recognize AI as a subject of authorship.
- Articles 12 and 18 of the LFDA are constitutional, as limiting authorship to natural persons is considered an objective, reasonable, and internationally compatible standard.
- The principle of legal equality does not apply in this context, as humans and artificial systems possess fundamentally incompatible characteristics.
- The territoriality principle in intellectual property law reinforces that Mexican legislation governs registration requests submitted within the country.
The ruling confirms that only human beings can be considered authors, and only works created by humans are eligible for copyright protection. This position is consistent with prior decisions, including a 2022 ruling by the SCJN’s First Chamber, which held that legal entities cannot be authors, as creative action is exclusive to individuals.
International Context
Mexico is not alone in this approach. In the United States, for example, copyright protection requires a human creative component. Applicants must disclose which parts of a work were generated by AI. Works that modify AI-generated material or combine it with substantial human input may be eligible for protection.
Legal and Technological Challenges Ahead
While this decision aligns with prevailing international standards, it leaves open important questions about the legal treatment of works created with AI assistance. The central issue is the degree and quality of human contribution required for a work to be protected. What happens when human input is significant? How much is enough?
This precedent does not define the scope of protection or permissible use for AI-assisted content, and a clear, definitive line may be impossible to draw given the complexity and variety of possible scenarios.
Basham’s Commitment to Innovation and Legal Excellence
Aware of the legal and technological challenges ahead, Basham has assembled a multidisciplinary team with a practical and innovative approach to support individuals and companies navigating these emerging issues in intellectual property law.
Sincerely,
Juan Carlos Hernandez
Eduardo Castañeda
Mariana Vargas
Santiago Zubikarai
Orlando Osio
Luis Alberto Gonsen