Mexico's Senate approves rules letting ISPs cut off repeat copyright infringers

Overview

Updated 1 hour ago

Mexico's Senate voted 72-37 on November 3 to make internet providers legally responsible for piracy by their subscribers unless they publish a policy for cutting off repeat infringers. The Chamber of Deputies had already passed the same text in October, so the decree now goes to President Claudia Sheinbaum for signature.

The change matters because what can be terminated is the internet connection itself, not just an account. The law does not define who counts as a repeat infringer or how many accusations trigger a cutoff, and it does not require a court order. Each provider sets its own threshold.

Why it matters

A household's internet can be suspended based on piracy accusations alone, with no court order and no agreed definition of 'repeat infringer.'

Questions about this story

Free account needed to ask — your question is kept and asked for you right after sign-up. Answers are public.

No questions yet — be the first to ask.

Key Indicators

Senate votes in favor

Approved in general; 37 senators voted against.

Senate votes against

Opposition parties PAN, PRI and Movimiento Ciudadano voted no.

$250K

Maximum fine for noncompliant ISPs

Roughly 4.7 million pesos, or 40,000 times the UMA, applied by IMPI.

180

Days until the rules take effect

Counted from publication in the Diario Oficial de la Federación, which had not happened as of early November.

Voices

Curated perspectives — historical figures and your fellow readers.

People Involved

Claudia Sheinbaum

President of Mexico

Awaiting the decree for signature and publication

Aurora López-Portillo

Director of legal services, ClarkeModet

Commenting on implementation

Miguel Márquez Márquez

Senator, Partido Acción Nacional (PAN)

Voted against the reform

Carolina Viggiano

Senator, Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI)

Voted against the reform

Organizations Involved

Mexican Senate

Legislative chamber

Approved the reform and sent it to the president

The upper chamber of Mexico's Congress, which passed the copyright reform 72-37.

Chamber of Deputies

Lower house of the National Congress

Approved the text in October 2026

Mexico's lower chamber, which passed the reform text before the Senate.

Mexican Institute of Industrial Property (IMPI)

Federal regulator

Named as the enforcing agency

The agency that will apply fines of up to roughly 4.7 million pesos to noncompliant providers.

Telmex and Izzi

Internet access providers

Will need to publish termination policies

Major Mexican consumer internet providers that will have to publish repeat-infringer policies.

Office of the United States Trade Representative

Federal agency

Moved Mexico to a lower piracy watch-list tier in April

The US trade agency that cited the draft amendments when it downgraded Mexico's watch-list status.

Timeline

2020 November 2026

6 events Latest: 4 days ago

Tap a bar to jump to that date

November 2026
Senate approves ISP liability rules
Latest Legislation

Senators voted 72-37 in general and 71-37 in particular, sending the decree to President Sheinbaum.
4 days ago
October 2026
Chamber of Deputies approves the text
Legislation

The lower chamber passed the reform, sending it to the Senate.
October 2026
May 2026
Sheinbaum government proposes amendments
Legislation

The government proposed the changes to align Mexican law with the USMCA trade agreement.
May 2026
April 2026
USTR downgrades Mexico's watch-list tier
Trade

The USTR moved Mexico to a lower piracy watch-list tier, citing the draft amendments.
April 2026
January 2026
US copyright coalition presses Mexico
Statement

The copyright industry coalition IIPA complained Mexico's 2020 reform lacked clear secondary liability for infringement.
January 2026
2020
Mexico adds DMCA-style safe harbors
Legislation

A 2020 reform gave hosting platforms and search engines safe harbor only if they terminate repeat infringers. Consumer internet providers were left out.
2020

Scenarios

Sheinbaum signs and the rules take effect in 2027

Likely Resolves by Q2 2027

Discussed by: TorrentFreak, La Jornada, the Senate's legislative record

The decree is published in the Diario Oficial de la Federación, starting a 180-day clock. Providers then publish termination policies to keep safe-harbor protection. This is the path the legislative record sets out; the only open question is the publication date.

Providers adopt vague policies and enforcement stays thin

Possible Resolves by End of 2027

Discussed by: Aurora López-Portillo of ClarkeModet, EL CEO

Because the law does not define 'repeat infringer' or set a threshold, providers write broad policies and rarely terminate anyone. IMPI would have to prove a provider knowingly contributed to infringement or profited from it, a higher bar than simply lacking a policy.

Courts suspend the reform over due-process objections

Unlikely Resolves by Q3 2027

Discussed by: Opposition senators in the Senate debate

Opposition lawmakers argued the law lets service be cut without a court order and could take whole households offline. A constitutional challenge could freeze enforcement while the Supreme Court reviews it. An earlier proposal to require a court order was rejected in the Senate.

Historical Context

3 moments from history that rhyme with this story — and how they unfolded.

October 1998

The United States created safe harbors that shield internet providers from liability for user infringement, on the condition they adopt a policy for terminating repeat infringers in appropriate circumstances.

Then

Providers gained protection from most user-conduct lawsuits.

Now

The repeat-infringer condition became the center of years of litigation over how actively providers must police subscribers.

Why this matters now

Mexico's 2020 reform copied this structure for platforms; the new amendments extend the same condition to consumer internet providers.

March 2026

Cox Communications ruling (2026)

The US Supreme Court wiped out a $1 billion verdict against Cox Communications, holding that knowing about piracy and failing to act does not by itself make an internet provider liable for contributing to it.

Then

US record labels lost their main route to holding providers liable for subscriber piracy.

Now

The ruling narrowed secondary liability in the US, pushing rightsholders toward legislative routes in other countries.

Why this matters now

Mexico's law takes a different route: failing to meet the safe-harbor condition is itself the first requirement for liability, so the Cox reasoning does not directly apply.

2009-2013

France's HADOPI three-strikes system (2009-2013)

France created an agency to send warnings to suspected pirates and, after repeated strikes, suspend internet access. The system depended on accusations rather than court orders for its early stages.

Then

The agency sent hundreds of thousands of warnings but few disconnections.

Now

The disconnection penalty was repealed in 2013, and the agency was folded into a broader media regulator.

Why this matters now

It is the closest precedent for cutting internet access over repeated accusations, and it shows how hard the enforcement step is to carry out in practice.