Mexico: Copyright infringement by hyperlinking

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Cookies Settings

Mexico: Copyright infringement by hyperlinking

Sponsored by

olivares-400px.jpg
hyperlink-min-final.jpg

The use of hyperlinks may be considered as a trade-related copyright infringement under certain circumstances.

There are three types of hyperlinks: (1) deep linking: when a link redirects to another website where illegal works are hosted; (2) inline linking: when a link opens directly a file that contains a work; and (3) surface linking: when a link redirects to the home page of another website.

The first two types of links may be considered as an unauthorised use of works. In fact, in Mexico there is already a precedent in which our authorities determined a trade-related copyright infringement for the use of deep linking. The website that provides the links redirects to illegal websites that host works without the authorisation of the copyright or neighbouring rights holder.

Such activities are considered as an act of public communication of works by making them available to the public. So it becomes necessary to have the authorisation of the copyright or neighbouring rights holder to use works in such a way.

This trade-related copyright infringement may be confirmed by making the analysis, of such activities in light of the three-step test contained in the Berne Convention, which is the basis of every copyright exception:

  • Certain special cases.

  • Do not conflict with a normal exploitation of a work.

  • Do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author.

Hyperlinking is not a special case of exception: it conflicts with the normal exploitation of the work since the use of the work does not consider any kind of remuneration to the copyright owner and it prejudices the legitimate interests of the author since the original authorisation to use the work was different (in most cases, the use is authorised by a restricted access).

Exceptions to hyperlinking may be legally applicable when the three-step test is duly completed.

Llanes

Mauricio Llanes


Olivares

Pedro Luis Ogazón No 17

Col San Angel

01000 México DF

Tel: +5255 53 22 30 00

Fax: +5255 53 22 30 01

olivlaw@olivares.com.mx

www.olivares.com.mx

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Three successive wins have got the firm eyeing additional opportunities as ITC work booms
While many firms remain focused on generative AI, recent hires and practice launches suggest the next battle may be for lawyers who understand how AI is moving into the physical world
The explosion of data centres has prompted patent pool operators to create new licensing opportunities
The court struck out copyright claims brought by Ladbrokes owner Entain, saying that ownership details should have been completed before litigation began
Düsseldorf has overtaken Munich as the UPC's busiest division, while firms including Winston Taylor, Clifford Chance, and Hoyng Rokh Monegier featured in disputes involving Abbott, Essity, Amazon and Hurom
The managing partner gave up an equity partnership track in New York to build a practice in India. More than a decade later, she discusses entrepreneurship, leadership, and why women should not wait before taking the next step
Vice presidents Shinya Jitsuhiro and Hirohisa Suzuki discuss litigation trends in Japan, recruitment challenges and clients’ international expansion
IP boutique Petillion represented IKEA in the dispute, which concerned the use of the multinational’s trademarks in an immigration-focused campaign. The firm tells Managing IP how it secured the outcome
The Pizzeys-Griffith Hack integration was designed to create a stronger Australian IP platform but with several ex-Pizzeys principals now gone, the deal's success may depend on where clients place their trust
Thomas Lonsdale and Hsu Min Chung of HGF explore the practical impact of the EPO’s Enlarged Board of Appeal’s decision in G1/25 and its interplay with G1/24
Gift this article