Skip Navigation

  1. About Us
    1. Overview
    2. History
    3. Recognition
    4. Offices
  2. Our Practice
    1. Practice Areas
      1. Patents, Utility Models, and Industrial Designs
      2. Trademarks
      3. Copyrights
      4. Corporate, Commercial and Business Law
      5. IP Litigation, Alternative Dispute Resolution
      6. Regulatory Law
      7. Licensing, Tech Transfer & Franchising
      8. Anti-Piracy, Anti-Counterfeiting & Enforcement
    2. Industry Groups
      1. Media, Sports & Entertainment Law Group
      2. Life Science & Pharmaceutical Law Group
  3. Our People
    1. Partners
      1. Sergio L. Olivares, Sr. † (1931-2010)
      2. Sergio L. Olivares, Jr.
      3. Luis C. Schmidt
      4. Cesar Ramos, Jr.
      5. Antonio Belaunzaran
      6. Gustavo A. Alcocer
      7. Jose Ignacio De Santiago
      8. Alejandro Luna
      9. Alonso Camargo
      10. Daniel Sanchez
    2. Associates (A - M)
      1. Osvaldo Amaral
      2. Armando Arenas
      3. Sofía Arroyo
      4. Guillermo Ballesteros
      5. Varinia Calleros
      6. Abraham Diaz
      7. Georgina Flores
      8. Pedro Herrera
      9. Carlos Maya
    3. Associates (N - Z)
      1. Mauricio Narváez
      2. Víctor Ramírez
      3. Sergio Rangel
      4. Maria del Carmen Sada
      5. Juan Luis Serrano
      6. Guillermo Treviño
      7. Carlos Woodworth
    4. All Attorneys / Engineers
    5. Firm Administration
  4. Knowledge & Resources
    1. Articles
      1. Trademark Law Articles
        1. Use requirements
        2. Approach to composite marks changed, again
        3. Life Sciences Handbook 2011 - Country Q&A
        4. Mexico should accept secondary meaning
        5. Getting the Deal Through - Trademarks 2011
        6. Pharmaceutical Trademarks 2010/2011 - A Global Guide
        7. No legal basis for banning names derived from INNs
        8. How Latin America tackles cutting-edge IP issues
        9. Specialised IP court corrects IMPI
        10. Protecting trade dress
        11. 43 more items...
      2. Patent Law Articles
        1. Getting the Deal Through - Patents 2012
        2. Surge of Patent Application Final Rejections Provides Unique Opportunity for Patent Precent Making
        3. Mexico issues regulations to approve biologic drugs
        4. Latin America Roundtable
        5. New regulations pending
        6. The International Comparative Guide
        7. Marketing authorization for pharmaceutical
        8. Approval of follow-on biologics in Mexico
        9. Mexican Linkage Gazette April 2011
        10. Patent Prosecution Highway in Mexico
        11. 37 more items...
      3. Copyright Law Articles
        1. Advertising in social media networks
        2. Technology challenges digital rights
        3. Exceptions to copyright protection and the permitted uses of copyright works in the hi-tech and digital sectors
        4. Derechos sobre producción audiovisual
        5. How Latin America tackles cutting-edge IP issues
        6. Copyright Litigation 2010
        7. Legislation and enforcement - Copyrights 2010
        8. Valuing folklore
        9. Protecting novel ideas
        10. Mexico's fair use balancing act
        11. 100 more items...
      4. Corporate Law Articles
        1. Mexico issues Personal Data Protection Rules
        2. How data affects innovation
        3. A practical cross-border
        4. New registry for security interests
        5. The International Comparative Legal Guide to: Merger Control 2011
        6. The International Comparative Legal Guide to: Merger Control 2010
        7. Due diligence issues to consider in M&A
        8. Income expectations in licensing
        9. The reasons for valuation
        10. Amendments proposed to franchise regulation
      5. IP Litigation, ADR Articles
        1. Scope of new specialised courts widened
        2. Reform of preliminary injunctions
        3. Mexican Patent Office excludes Formulation Patents from Linkage Gazette
        4. Mexico gets ready to approve biocomparable drugs
        5. Mexico's hotel for the stars highlights power in the name
        6. Supreme Court upholds the worth of formulation patents
        7. Getting the Deal Through - Patents 2010
        8. Getting the Deal Through Trademarks 2010
        9. Trademark enforcement
        10. Venues for appealing IMPI decisions
        11. 15 more items...
      6. Regulatory Law Articles
        1. Recent amendment to the Federal Law for Consumer Protection
        2. Amendments to the Federal Law for Consumer Protection
        3. Mexico issues Personal Data Protection Rules
        4. New Regulations Pending
        5. Marketing authorization for pharmaceutical products to foreign applicants
        6. Data Package Exclusivity (DPE)
        7. Supreme Court upholds the worth of formulation patents
        8. Pharmaceutical trademarks
        9. Framework for biotherapeutic products established
        10. Pharmaceutical Advertising 2009
        11. 4 more items...
      7. Licensing, Tech Transfer Articles
        1. Creating a secure franchise system
      8. Anti-Piracy, Anti-Counterfeiting Articles
        1. New register against counterfeits
        2. Beat the counterfeiters in Mexico
        3. Battling counterfeits through Customs
        4. Getting the Deal Through Trademarks 2010
        5. Enforcing plant variety rights in Mexico
        6. Pharmaceutical Trademarks 2009
        7. Internet Issues
        8. Anti-counterfeiting 2009
        9. Vegetal variety rights enforced
        10. New Customs rules lead to seizures
        11. 3 more items...
      9. Media, Sports & Entertainment Focused Articles
        1. Advertising in social media networks
        2. Whither Rental Rights?
        3. Improved protection for personalities
      10. Life Sciences Focused Articles
        1. Latin America Roundtable
        2. New regulations pending
        3. The International Comparative
        4. Approval of follow-on biologics in Mexico
        5. Global Pharmaceutical Linkage Regulations:
        6. Life Sciences Handbook 2011 - Country Q&A
        7. Supreme Court upholds the worth of formulation patents
        8. Repercussions expected on medicine advertising campaign in Mexico
        9. Framework for biotherapeutic products established
        10. Pharmaceutical Trademarks 2009
        11. 1 more item...
    2. Webinar Archive
      1. Webinar - Changes to Mexican Patent and Healthcare Laws for Life Sciences
      2. Webinar - Digital Rights Issues in Copyright Law
      3. Webinar - Data Package Exclusivity Rights in Latin America
    3. Recognition
    4. News
      1. Mexico subscribes Madrid Protocol
      2. Presumed Guilty - How can a law firm help win an Emmy?
      3. New rules came in force to speed timeframes in administrative appeal proceedings
      4. Recent reforms to the Mexican Industrial Property Law dealing with trademark priority rights
      5. Olivares & Cia. ranking
      6. Data Package Exclusivity (DPE)
      7. Mr. Sergio Olivares Sr's Passing
      8. Pharma Linkage Regulations Supreme Court Decision
      9. Managing IP magazine has recognized Olivares & Cia. as the leading firm for patent work in Mexico
      10. Mexican Congress amends the Patent Law
      11. 1 more item...
  5. Events
  6. Offices
  7. Contact Us
  8. Quick guide to Mexico’s regulatory system
    1. Patent regulatory overview
    2. Trademark regulatory overview
    3. Copyright regulatory overview
    4. Corporate & Commercial Regulatory overview

Home » Knowledge & Resources » Articles » Copyright Law Articles » Bill hopes to put an end to remuneration muddle

Bill hopes to put an end to remuneration muddle

By Luis C. Schmidt
Partner
World Copyright Law Report, June 2006
The Chamber of Deputies has approved a bill to insert Article 26ter, which deals with remuneration rights for reproduction of works of authorship, into the Copyright Act.
Three years ago Congress passed a bill adopting Article 26bis, a remuneration right for the public communication of works, in line with a proposal by the Sociedad de Autores y Compositores de Música (SACM). SACM claimed that music publishers were failing to pay authors the agreed royalties, so proposed modifying the Copyright Act to enable authors to claim compensation directly form users. Congress failed to consider the impact this would have on users and passed the bill without analyzing it in detail.
Groups of affected users filed actions against the bill, arguing that Article 26 bis imposed a unfair burden on them by triggering highter duties for the use of works. The second chambers of the Supreme Court stated that Article 26 refers to a remuneration right (ie, an irrevocable right held by authors and assignees – including publishers – to receive compensation for the exploitation of works), which is different from the patrimonial right of public performance (ie, the exlusive right to authorize or prevent the exploitation of a work). Remuneration rights allow users to use works of authorship freely without having to obtain consent from the copyright holder, provided they compensate the author and the assignee.
The Supreme Court’s interpretation of Article 26 bis is completely different from the approach proposed by SACM. It also overlooks the fact that the remuneration system which it contemplates would co-exist with the patrimonial rights system, without defining when each would apply. It is evident that the two systems cannot be applied at the same time, as the owner of the patrimonial rights (ie, the author) cannot execute his or her exclusive right to authorize or prohibit the public communication of the work at the same time as the author so his or her assignee execute their own remuneration right – such a situation could lead to us being asked to pay multiple remuneration for a work.
In an attempt to resolve the issue, the Chamber of Deputies is analyzing the possible adoption of Article 26 ter, in order to extend the system of remuneration. The idea behind the initiative is that:
“authors and composer of music may collect directly and independently, thorugh an attorney or by means of a collecting society to which they are members, the royalties that correspond to the reproduction of its works, without affecting in any way the royalties belongig to the publishers of music, who execute a derived right” (Decision of the Commission of Culture of the Chamber of Deputies, page 2)
However, critics have pointed out several technical problems in the methodology of the initiative. As it stands the harmful effects of Article 26 bis would simply be transferred to Article 26 ter. The initiative also grants SACM’s demand for a direct royalty from users, in addition to the one obtained indirectly as a result of assignment agreements that authors enter into with publishers or other assigness. The only actual effect of the bill would be to involve users in the disputes between authors and assignees.
Finally, many critics find the idea of adopting a system of remuneration for public communication alarming if it is applied to reproduction and distribution rights. Reproduction a method of exploitation controlled by the owner of the patrimonial rights: the owner may impede any use made by a third party of the work and, therefore, may take criminal actions against anyone who infringes the reproduction right. However, if reproduction rights are classed as a remuneration right then, under the Supreme Court’s interpretations, any third party may make copies of a work without authorization provided he or she pays a royalty. Critics fear that such a situation could generate a greater amount of piracy and send the situation out of control.