The blocking of web pages due to stream ripping in Mexico

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

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

The blocking of web pages due to stream ripping in Mexico

Sponsored by

olivares-400px.jpg
earphones-6597967.jpg

Moisés Castorena Katz of Olivares reports on a non-binding resolution that draws on the Mexican Supreme Court’s ruling that web pages can be blocked if they violate third-party copyright to a sufficient degree

On August 25 2023, a non-binding resolution issued by a Circuit Court in Mexico City correctly followed the criterion the Supreme Court used in its ruling on the famous Alestra case. The Supreme Court determined that the blocking of web pages is appropriate when they contain, in a major amount, infringing content of third parties’ copyrights.

The non-binding resolution maintains that in an amparo trial (comparable to the North American judicial review), a provisional suspension requested by internet providers against any orders to block internet pages, with the aim to avoid such blocking, must be denied when the page offers users, predominantly, services of ‘content ripping’ or ‘stream ripping’. Such services would be against public order provisions and would affect the social interest.

This legal criterion of the Circuit Court stems from the arguments applied by the Supreme Court when resolving the Alestra case. The dispute concerned the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property imposing a blocking order as a precautionary measure on a website using sound recordings through hyperlinks, without the authorisation of the corresponding rights holder.

The Circuit Court correctly qualified the concept of ‘totality’ – in terms of the amount of infringing content on the website – and interpreted that the refusal of the courts to grant provisional measures against the order to block a website is appropriate in cases in which the violations of third-party copyrights are carried out predominantly. This, in a personal opinion, is what the Supreme Court sought to convey through the arguments of the Alestra case sentence.

Although the non-binding resolution is not mandatory, it is indicative for future related cases.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Deborah Kirk discusses why IP and technology have become central pillars in transactions and explains why clients need practically minded lawyers
IP STARS, Managing IP’s accreditation title, reveals its latest rankings for patent work, including which firms are moving up
Leaders at US law firms explain what attorneys can learn from AI cases involving Meta and Anthropic, and why the outcomes could guide litigation strategies
Attorneys reveal the trademark and copyright trends they’ve noticed within the first half of 2025
Senior leaders at TE Connectivity and Clarivate explain how they see the future of innovation
A new action filed by Nokia against Asus and a landmark ruling on counterfeits by South Africa’s Supreme Court were also among the top talking points
Counsel explain how they’re navigating patent prosecution matters and highlight key takeaways from Federal Circuit cases
A partner who joined Fenwick alongside two others explains what drew her to the firm and her hopes for growth in Boston
The England and Wales High Court has granted Kirkland & Ellis client Samsung interim declaratory relief in its ongoing FRAND dispute with ZTE
A UDRP decision that found in favour of a small business in a domain name dispute could encourage more businesses to take a stand in ‘David v Goliath’ cases
Gift this article