By: Jaime Israel Dávila Gómez, Attorney
In recent years, one of the most discussed topics in the field of intellectual property has been the use of artificial intelligence for the creation and generation of works.
In Mexico, this debate had been ongoing without any legislative reforms to copyright laws to specifically regulate this phenomenon, and without a definitive court ruling on the matter.
However, the Intellectual Property Specialized Chamber of the Federal Court of Administrative Justice recently ruled that creations made using artificial intelligence cannot be considered works, do not generate copyright, and therefore cannot be registered.
The reasoning behind this decision is that there is no active participation by a natural person (human being) in expressing the artistic idea, which is a product of human intellectual activity. In other words, only natural persons can be considered authors, and only their creative activity results in a work and the creation of exclusive rights in their favor.
This legal interpretation, while subject to potential changes by higher courts, aligns with rulings and decisions made in various countries worldwide. In these cases, it has been established that the instructions given by a natural person to artificial intelligence are insufficient for what is generated by the latter to be regarded as a form of expression equivalent to that created by humans.
In my opinion, the decision made in Mexico adheres entirely to the law. If it were desired to recognize such creations as works, the law would need to be amended to establish parameters defining in which cases something constitutes a work, in which cases it does not, and who should be considered as holders and/or authors.