It is reported that the Communications Services Regulatory Unit (URSEC), the executive authority for the supervision and administration of services in the telecommunications sector, is independent from the government in the decision-making process. In accordance with national legislation (Law 17.296), the URSEC has been established as a decentralised and autonomous public entity.

Pursuant to Art. 3 of Decree No. 92/014, the computer systems of the Central Administration are required to be housed within secure data centres located in Uruguay, except in instances where the associated public entity is not exposed to risk, as determined by specific guidelines outlined in the aforementioned Decree. Accordingly, unless such risk is absent, public entities forming part of the Central Administration must retain their data within the national territory. The guidelines in question establish general requirements pertaining to infrastructure and operational standards, including telecommunications systems, architectural design, electrical and mechanical systems, access control and security measures, system monitoring, service availability, and service level provisions.

Several regulations implement limits to the storage of data abroad by financial institutions regulated by the Central Bank of Uruguay (BCU). In particular, prior authorisation from the BCU may be required if the storage of such information is deemed, under banking law, to constitute data processing. In this regard, the BCU has maintained that cloud computing services may be classified as a form of data processing outsourcing. Consequently, in order for a financial services institution to engage the services of a foreign cloud computing provider, it must first submit a formal request for authorisation to the BCU. This request must include details of the proposed contract, information about the service provider, and an impact assessment outlining the risks associated with the outsourcing arrangement. In addition, the financial institution is obliged to establish a local data backup or maintain a unified access point on its premises.

Uruguay is a party to the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT).

Uruguay has a copyright regime under the Law No. 9.739. However, the exceptions do not follow the fair use or fair dealing model, therefore limiting the lawful use of copyrighted work by others. Art. 45 lists the exceptions, which include the publication of works intended for teaching, excerpts, fragments of poetry, and single articles, provided that the author's name is indicated; Publication of works intended for teaching, excerpts, fragments of poetry, and single articles, provided that the author's name is indicated; dissemination of news, reports, and journalistic information as long as their exact version is maintained and their origin is expressed; among others.

Copyright is not adequately enforced online in Uruguay. It is reported that 37% of broadband households in the country consume online piracy. In addition, an estimated 56% of the population consumes illegal online streaming services, and 18% of households consume illegal pay-TV.

Uruguay has ratified the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Copyright Treaty.

Uruguay has ratified the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Performances and Phonograms Treaty.

Uruguay lacks a comprehensive framework in place that provides effective protection of trade secrets, but there are limited measures addressing some issues related to them.
In particular, Uruguayan law protects confidential commercial information through a range of instruments, including rules on public information and administrative confidentiality, and it recognises limits on compelled disclosure of commercially sensitive information, such as trade secrets and know-how, in certain regulatory contexts.
Art. 10 of Law No. 18.381 classifies as confidential commercial, industrial, scientific, and technical information whose disclosure could harm a party’s competitive position. Moreover, Art. 14 of Law No. 18.159 provides that requests for information by the competition authority do not create an obligation to disclose trade secrets, know-how, inventions, formulas, or patents.

Art. 59 of the Consolidated Text on Accounting and Financial Administration (TOCAF) establishes the Public Procurement Program for Development, which authorises the use of special procurement regimes and procedures to support domestic suppliers, particularly micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs).
Within this framework, instruments such as price-preference margins and market-reservation mechanisms may be applied in favour of domestic producers and suppliers. The price preference margin may reach up to twice the margins established in Art. 58 (which go from 8% to 16%), while procurement reserved for the market may not exceed 10% of the total contracts and purchases of the same agency in the relevant fiscal year. Art. 60 further provides that the program shall include, inter alia, a Subprogram for Public Procurement for Scientific and Technological Development and Innovation, coordinated by the National Agency for Research and Innovation.
Decree No. 371/010, which regulates the Public Procurement Subprogramme for the Development of MSMEs, further operationalises this framework by setting eligibility conditions.

Uruguay is not a party to the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA), nor does it have observer status.

According to Art. 2 of the Investment Promotion and Protection Law 16906, the State of Uruguay establishes equal treatment in the regime of admission and treatment of investments made by foreign and domestic investors.

Uruguay is not a signatory of the 1996 World Trade Organization (WTO) Information Technology Agreement (ITA) nor the 2015 expansion (ITA II).

Pursuant to Art. 58 of the Consolidated Text on Accounting and Financial Administration (TOCAF), public procurement may apply a price preference margin in favour of goods and services that qualify as domestic.
For goods, the preference margin is 8% and it is applied to the price of domestic goods delivered to the buyer’s warehouses. The Executive Branch must determine the minimum domestic content threshold required for a good to qualify as domestic, which may not be lower than 35% of that price.
For services, the preference margin is likewise 8%, applied to the service price. Where the service includes the supply of goods, the preference margin does not apply to the portion of the price corresponding to goods that do not qualify as domestic.
Art. 58 also provides for an additional 4% preference margin (for goods and services) for companies that include in their workforce persons of African descent, persons with disabilities, and transgender persons, in accordance with the relevant legislation and regulations. This margin may be incorporated into the standard procurement specifications for supply and non-personal service contracts.
Finally, to promote production in regions with relatively lower levels of economic development, the preference margin referred to above may be increased up to 16%. The Executive Branch is responsible for setting the applicable percentage by department, taking into account average departmental income relative to the national average, and for establishing the method to verify compliance with the relevant requirements.
Decree No. 13/009 further regulates the procedural framework applicable to these preference margins. It specifies the criteria for qualifying as national, including, inter alia, the national-content threshold for goods and the relevant criteria for national services and works.