In the dynamic landscape of Intellectual Property, we are facing a pivotal moment. The advent of artificial intelligence has sparked a debate of utmost importance: can synthetic entities acquire legal personality and, consequently, copyright? This question, which until recently seemed confined to the realm of science fiction, is being addressed by the First Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation. Artificial intelligence has radically transformed our conception of intellectual creation. Algorithms and AI systems are capable of generating artistic works, musical compositions, literary texts, and other creations that challenge traditional notions of authorship. In this context, the issue facing this First Chamber is crucial as it raises complex ethical and legal challenges. How can we ensure the accountability of AI in cases of copyright infringement? Who should be considered the rights holder in the case of works generated by AI systems: the human creator who designed the algorithm or the AI itself?

Is the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation ready for the Fourth Industrial Revolution?
In this regard, it is equally relevant to consider the proposed reform regarding the appointment of justices through popular vote. The importance of having highly qualified experts in such critical areas as intellectual property and artificial intelligence cannot be underestimated. Moreover, electing individuals who are not prepared to address these issues could jeopardize the integrity of the judicial system in matters of this nature.

In conclusion, we are facing a crucial moment that demands deep reflection on the role of law in a society undergoing constant transformation. The final decision will not only set a legal precedent but also determine the direction of intellectual property protection in the era of artificial intelligence.
It is essential to ensure that this decision is made with the utmost objectivity and technical knowledge. Therefore, I believe that the appointment of justices should not be through popular vote, but rather they should be individuals with a solid judicial career that supports their experience and expertise in addressing the challenges posed by this fourth industrial revolution.