Commons talk:Copyright rules by territory/Mexico

This talk page may have a limited number of watchers. Issues concerning the copyright rules of Mexico may get more attention if a notice of the discussion here is given at a general page like Commons:Village pump/Copyright or Commons talk:Freedom of panorama.

Copyright terms

The current text on the page claims that the copyright term is granted for the life of the author plus X years pma. Mexican copyright law, however, was traditionally based on the date of publication and/or creation. See this summary for pre-1928 law and the 1928 Federal Civil Code art. 1181 etc. which only grants a fixed term of protection without mentioning when it shall begin. So I would like to know when the change to "life of the author plus copyright term" was made. This is essential for calculating the expiry of copyright in {{PD-Mexico}}. E. g. compare the 1982 amendement where the term is extended to the life of the author plus 50 years (art. 23) but pusthumously published and anonymous works are protected for 50 years past their first publication (art. 23 II, III), and sound recordings or performances are protected for 30 years from their first publication (art. 90). De728631 (talk) 16:57, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

I believe they went to 20pma in 1947 (effective Jan 29, 1948), which also removed the registration requirement.[1] They then went to 30pma in 1963.[2] Carl Lindberg (talk) 17:18, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Commons:Village pump/Copyright/Archive/2019/05#PD-Mexico incomplete - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 17:55, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Text from threshold of originality section

@Tbhotch: added the below paragraph to the threshold of originality section. It seems pretty nonsensical in general and also has nothing to do with copyright laws, in Mexico or otherwise. To make things worse @Tbhotch: was unwilling to tell me where they got the information from. So I decided to revert it until such evidence is tendered. There should also be some discussion as to the legitimacy of such evidence before it is put back into the article.

• Logos of private entities, like football teams or companies. The "governmental / non-governmental organization / officially recognized organization" phrase does not refer to every existing organization but to organizations created under that specific purpose. In simple terms, if the company uses ".com" on their website, they are not covered as an organization. If they use a ".org", they function as an organization.

--Adamant1 (talk) 14:06, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

All works before 1948 are public domain?

Copyright before 1948 was for a maximum of 30 years after publication, and subsequent laws were not retroactive. Does this mean all works published in Mexico before 1948 would, as of today, be in the public domain? If this is the case, shouldn't it be added to {{PD-Mexico}}? SilverStar54 (talk) 02:46, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

I think the 1948 law did apply to works still under copyright at the time (even if it wasn't retroactive to works that had become public domain). So I think all works before 1918 in Mexico are public domain (unless it is a scientific work). Nosferattus (talk) 16:10, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

I've updated the {{PD-Mexico}} template to include "It is an artistic or literary work published before 1918". Nosferattus (talk) 16:29, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Okay! Did you have a particular source to come to that conclusion? SilverStar54 (talk) 15:47, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@SilverStar54: I cited the 1928 law in the template. Do you think that's adequate? Nosferattus (talk) 17:03, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Oh I meant the conclusion that the 1948 law extended copyrights that were in force at that time. SilverStar54 (talk) 17:08, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

URAA terms

Our guidelines say "On the URAA date (1996-01-01), the Copyright Act of 1982 was still applicable." Yet it also says "The term was extended to life plus 75 years in 1993, effective 1 January 1994." These two statements seem contradictory. Nosferattus (talk) 16:13, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

'freedom of panorama' section

This section is unfortunately a bit all over the place. Can we please remove (1) the sentence about the Mexico City metro (which has no power to regulate or interpret copyright law), and (2) the definition from the Mexican telecommunications act (which is is a different field of law)? Gnom (talk) 15:39, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

 Oppose. Removing the sentence about the Mexico City Metro will not make filming or taking photographs legal. Furthermore, it is not an interpretation of the copyright law, but an internal rule (which actually says that filming can only be done with a permit and without profit motive) [3]. I have no opinion on what it say about the telecommunications law. Regards.--Gusama Romero </talk> 00:54, 17 September 2024 (UTC)