Can you advertise football-related content during the 2026 World Cup without being an official sponsor? The answer could be yes. But if the advertising intends to present itself as 2026 World Cup advertising or suggests a relationship with the 2026 World Cup, the answer is no: that right belongs to the sponsors, licensees, and commercial partners authorized by FIFA.
The most recent reform to the Federal Law for the Protection of Industrial Property (LFPPI), published on April 3, 2026, raises the standard of analysis. The criterion is no longer limited solely to the use of registered trademarks but also considers the consumer perception. The margin of error has just narrowed.
The LFPPI reform introduces a new ground for infringement directly linked to Ambush Marketing. With the FIFA World Cup 2026 on the horizon, this change has direct implications for any company planning activations, promotions, or unofficial World Cup or football-related advertising campaigns.
The Ambush Marketing —also known as parasitic advertising— is the strategy by which a company that is not an official sponsor of an event seeks to associate itself with it to leverage its visibility, without having acquired the corresponding rights.
It is not a new phenomenon. However, the reform places it at the center of regulatory analysis in Mexico.
Before the publication of the decree, Ambush Marketing was considered a gray area: it was a type of unfair competition due to risk of association, but the legal parameter for sanctioning it required the use of a trademark, work, or other intellectual property right. When such use was not direct, prosecuting and sanctioning it became complicated. Now, IMPI has express powers to investigate conduct or acts that suggest an association with mass events without the consent of their owner and, where applicable, impose fines of up to 29.3 million pesos and temporary or permanent closures.
The reform adds a new hypothesis to Article 386 of the LFPPI. The text, published in the DOF on April 3, 2026, states:
Article 386.- The following are administrative infringements:
(…)
II.- To carry out, in the exercise of industrial or commercial activities, acts that cause or induce the public to confusion, error, or deception, by making them believe or falsely assume:
(…)
e) The existence of an official sponsorship relationship between a distinctive sign and a public or private mass gathering event;
Source: DOF, 03/04/2026
This provision aims to prevent the public from being led to believe that there is a non-existent official sponsorship relationship between a brand and high-profile events.
However, the wording is ambiguous, which can lead to broader interpretations that include assumptions not expressly described in the law.
Specifically, the regulatory challenge lies in defining the extent to which an advertising campaign can create a perception of official sponsorship or affiliation, even without the direct use of registered trademarks.
Before the reform, the analysis focused on the direct use of protected signs such as World Cup, FIFA World Cup, Mexico 2026, logos, trophies, mascots, or the event's visual identity.
Under the new framework, the standard is significantly broadened. Now, even indirect references, creative allusions, or evocative elements can be considered relevant if, collectively, they lead the public to believe there is an official sponsorship or relationship with the event.
This means the analysis is no longer solely literal and shifts towards consumer perception and the overall context of the campaign.
The central challenge of this reform is to strike a balance between protecting the rights of event organizers and their official sponsors, and the freedom of competition and commercial expression for third parties.
Therefore, the reform does imply an express prohibition against developing campaigns linked to the 2026 World Cup without being an official sponsor. What it does not prohibit is general football-themed advertising. However, it does require such campaigns to be carefully structured to avoid creating confusion or an undue association with the event or its sponsors.
Under this new standard, the risk is not limited to the direct use of trademarks. Even without mentioning FIFA or the World Cup, a campaign can be considered risky if it combines elements that, collectively, suggest an official affiliation.
In this regard, under the current framework: (a) infringements are no longer limited to the direct use of registered trademarks, (b) the analysis extends to indirect or evocative elements, and (c) the relevant criterion is the overall effect of the communication.
While this does not imply absolute prohibitions, the following elements can increase the risk of undue association and should be reviewed with particular care:
– use of the word “Mundial,” “Copa Mundial,” “World Cup,” or “Mexico 2026” in promotional contexts
– use of jerseys or apparel associated with national teams featuring official elements (crests, uniforms, or recognizable designs)
– representation of the tournament trophy
– use of stadiums identifiable as event venues
– logos, mascots, or visual identity elements of the World Cup
The relevant point is not each element individually, but rather the combination of factors that could create a perception of official sponsorship. The FIFA Intellectual Property Guidelines for the 2026 World Cup detail which signs are protected and the criteria for unauthorized association.
Thematic campaigns remain viable. The point is not to avoid football, but to structure communication with greater legal precision:
– use generic elements not identifiable with the event
– avoid messages suggesting authorization, endorsement, or official affiliation
– review the campaign comprehensively (not just piece by piece)
– document the legal analysis prior to launch
– train internal teams, agencies, and influencers.
The FIFA's Public Viewing rules for the 2026 World Cup (Canada, Mexico, and the United States) help illustrate how this risk operates in practice. These rules establish a relevant distinction between:
1. Sponsors (Sponsorship Rights). These are entities seeking formal association with the event, requiring prior approval from FIFA or the event licensee. This approval is necessary to avoid conflicts with the tournament's global sponsorship program and is managed through the authorized channel in each country.
2. Vendors of goods and services (Concessions). These are entities offering food, beverages, or other services during the event. In these cases, prior approval is not required, provided that no perception of sponsorship or official association with FIFA or the tournament is created.
The LFPPI reform expressly prohibits conduct that falsely suggests an official sponsorship with the 2026 World Cup. What is not prohibited is general football-themed advertising, provided it does not create confusion or an undue association.
The reform does elevate the standard of analysis by incorporating grounds for infringement based on the perception of official sponsorship, which broadens the scope of interpretation regarding Ambush Marketing.
In this context, advertising is no longer just a creative or commercial exercise, but also becomes an exercise in preventive legal assessment.
At RRQB, we assist our clients in structuring campaigns under this new regulatory framework, with the aim of mitigating risks and maximizing the value of their intangible assets.
.png)
.svg)
.svg)
