Mexico’s proposed reforms to copyright and labor laws regarding artificial intelligence (AI) have raised alarm bells within the Mexican Internet Association (AIMX), which warns that the changes could lead to increased legal uncertainty and operational burdens on key sectors such as advertising, audiovisual production, and technology platforms. The association is advocating for a comprehensive technical review of these reforms, highlighting concerns that ambiguous legal provisions may deter investment, stifle innovation, and complicate the enforcement of digital rights.
The proposed initiative arises in response to legal conflicts surrounding AI-generated content, particularly following rulings by the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN). In August 2025, the court ruled that works produced solely by AI do not qualify for copyright protection, emphasizing that the legal framework is centered on human creativity. The SCJN’s decision effectively placed AI-generated works in the public domain, as they lack the essential human attribute necessary for copyright registration.
This judicial stance was further solidified in July 2025, when the Second Chamber of the SCJN established a legal precedent concerning the copyright status of AI outputs through a ruling on Amparo Directo 6/2025. The case arose from a challenge by Gerald García, who sought to register a virtual avatar created by AI. The court ruled that since moral ownership of creative works belongs to natural persons, AI-generated works cannot be registered under the Federal Copyright Law.
The legal landscape became more contentious following an incident involving the unauthorized digital cloning of the voice of voice actor José Lavat, which was used in a video produced by the National Electoral Institute (INE). This incident led to protests from voice actors and broadcasters advocating for the protection of personal and creative rights related to voice synthesis. In response, PRI Deputy Mónica Sandoval introduced a proposal aimed at regulating synthetic images and voices to safeguard performers’ rights.
The proposed reforms pivot around three key areas: consent, remuneration, and transparency. Sandoval argues that while advancements in technology present new opportunities, they also pose risks of unauthorized use and potential job displacement for performers. The initiative aims to amend both the Federal Copyright Law and the Federal Labor Law to address these challenges.
Among the proposed changes is the addition of articles 87 Bis, 87 Ter, 87 Quater, and 87 Quinquies to the Federal Copyright Law, creating a new regulatory framework for digital identities and synthetic media. Article 87 Bis, for instance, defines “synthetic use of image or voice” and establishes the requirement for “prior, free, and informed authorization,” detailing the usage’s modality, scope, duration, territory, and purpose.
Further provisions mandate the establishment of a voluntary digital registry by the National Copyright Institute to document authorizations, licenses, and contracts for the use of images and voices. Although registration is voluntary, the documentation serves as evidence of agreed-upon terms. Article 87 Quinquies dictates that any advertisement employing a synthetic version of an identifiable individual must include a clear notice informing the audience of the synthetic nature of the content.
In addition to changes to copyright regulations, the reforms propose amendments to Article 305 of the Federal Labor Law, requiring employers to include specific clauses in artistic service contracts that detail the potential for synthetic use and provide workers with a comprehensive copy of the contract at no cost. Non-compliance with these provisions may lead to sanctions under both labor and copyright laws.
Despite the intent to protect performers, AIMX identifies several potential pitfalls that could adversely affect the digital ecosystem. The organization cautions that the proposed requirements for specific authorizations may be challenging to implement within the rapidly evolving digital landscape, leading to increased operational burdens incompatible with the principles of proportionality in regulation.
Key concerns include heightened legal uncertainty due to vague terms that could lead to a rise in legal disputes, which may deter investment and innovation. AIMX also highlights the need for clearer distinctions between legitimate uses of AI and potential abuses to avoid stifling national technological advancement. Moreover, the absence of explicit exceptions for parody, satire, and educational use threatens to undermine freedom of expression, which is crucial for fostering creativity.
From an economic standpoint, the regulatory burden posed by these reforms could deter investment in Mexico’s creative and technological sectors. Researcher Hugo Buendía from UNAM points out that while synthesizing voices presents challenges to traditional legal frameworks, the emphasis should remain on protecting human creativity.
AIMX calls for ongoing dialogue with legislative bodies to shape a regulatory framework that balances the protection of performers with the need to foster innovation and maintain Mexico’s competitive edge in the digital economy. As the National Copyright Institute is tasked with implementing the digital registry within 90 days of the decree’s enactment, the future of AI regulation in Mexico hangs in the balance, with significant implications for various sectors and the broader economy.
See also
Bank of America Warns of Wage Concerns Amid AI Spending Surge
OpenAI Restructures Amid Record Losses, Eyes 2030 Vision
Global Spending on AI Data Centers Surpasses Oil Investments in 2025
Rigetti CEO Signals Caution with $11 Million Stock Sale Amid Quantum Surge
Investors Must Adapt to New Multipolar World Dynamics
