SCJN Declares AI-Generated Works Are Public Domain in Mexico

The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) rules that works produced exclusively by AI are not subject to copyright protection in Mexico. This decision means that such content is considered public domain and can be utilized without restriction, establishing a significant legal precedent in the era of generative technology.

The determination by the Second Chamber of the SCJN, presided over by Minister Lenia Batres, stems from Amparo Directo 6/2025, an appeal filed by Gerald García, Founder and CEO, Businessadvocacy. García sought to register an AI-generated avatar with the National Institute of Copyright (Indautor), a request that was denied. Indautor's initial refusal, based on the absence of human creation in the work, was upheld by the Specialized Chamber for Intellectual Property Matters of the Federal Court of Administrative Justice (TFJA), which led the case to the SCJN.

The judgment of Amparo Directo 6/2025 states in section 100: "Moral ownership belongs exclusively to the author as a natural person and subject protected by copyright, therefore, content generated by AI should not be recognized under this creative matter, as it is of a human character in terms of Article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights."

“In conclusion, AI products are in the public domain because they are not an original work and, consequently, they are not copyrightable since they are based on knowledge held by mankind as a whole,” reads section 101.

Legal and Argumentative Context

García’s central argument for registering his virtual avatar, detailed in Section "II. Background of the Challenged Act," relied on the contribution of specific inputs. These inputs included personal photographs and guiding parameters, or prompts, provided to the AI for generating the content in his likeness. Additionally, a request was made for the recognition of moral rights in favor of the AI system, on the reasoning that the creative decision-making ability resided within the algorithm. 

A reinterpretation of Articles 12 and 18 of the Federal Copyright Law (LFDA) was proposed, asserting the necessity to adapt legislation to the benefits derived from technological innovation. García also based his position on the pro persona principle, the American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR), and the (USMCA), which promotes innovation and access to new technologies.

The SCJN rejected these arguments. The judgment of Amparo Directo 6/2025 emphasizes that Articles 3 and 13 of the LFDA stipulate only natural persons can be recognized as authors. The Court underscores that creativity, originality, and individuality, essential requirements for copyright protection, originate from human experience, emotions, and intellect, attributes that AI systems lack. 

The SCJN’s interpretation maintains that, while the Constitution includes the right to benefit from scientific and technological development, this right cannot undermine already recognized fundamental rights, such as the right to authorship protection. The resolution clarifies that technological progress must not compromise the integrity of the copyright framework, whose purpose is to protect original human creations. Specifically, the ruling states the proposal to reinterpret the LFDA articles "is incompatible with the constitutional and conventional framework." 

The Supreme Court’s judgment, reconfirmed by Section 100 of the Amparo 6/2025, determines that products generated by AI are not registrable, automatically placing them in the public domain. This determination aims to facilitate the free dissemination of such content, particularly when it can generate a collective benefit. However, the Court concluded by distinguishing between the protection of software or computer programs that develop and improve AI, which are registrable, and the results or "products" derived from the use of AI, which are not, as reads section 102.