Motorola has filed a lawsuit in India against social media platforms and content creators over posts it alleges are defamatory, raising concerns it could dampen critical coverage of the company, experts say.
The lawsuit, filed in a Bengaluru court and obtained by TechCrunch, names platforms such as X, YouTube, and Instagram along with dozens of content creators, and seeks takedown of the content as well as broader restraint on what it describes as false or defamatory material related to the company’s devices.
In its over 60-page filing, Motorola has sought a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from publishing or sharing what it describes as false or defamatory content about its products, including reviews, videos, comments, and boycott campaigns.
The complaint cites hundreds of posts across platforms, including videos alleging device issues and phones catching fire. But it is also targeting unfavorable product reviews and user commentary that the company alleges are false or defamatory.
Two content creators named in the suit, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said they learned about the case only after receiving an email from X’s support team on Tuesday notifying them that their account had been referenced in the proceedings.
In the email, X said it had received the lawsuit and was informing the user in the interest of transparency, suggesting they could seek legal counsel, contest the case, or remove the content.
One of the creators said the post cited in the suit related to an incident they had verified, adding that the company had replaced the device. “Brand is just mentally harassing us, and they want to set an example,” the creator told TechCrunch.
Techcrunch event
San Francisco, CA
|
October 13-15, 2026
“It will impact,” they said. “I will stop covering good parts too.”
India is the second-biggest market for Motorola after the U.S., accounting for about 21% of its global smartphone shipments in 2025, according to data from International Data Corporation (IDC). More than 90% of its devices shipped in India were in the sub-$250 segment, the IDC data showed — a price band where consumers often rely on online reviews and word of mouth.
Free-speech advocates contend that Motorola’s complaint is overreaching.
“When a single complaint pulls together hundreds of URLs and asks for a blanket injunction against all of them, it collapses categories that the law has traditionally kept separate,” said Apar Gupta, a lawyer and founding director at the New Delhi-based digital rights group Internet Freedom Foundation. He warned of a broader “chilling effect,” saying many creators may choose to take down content rather than face the cost and stress of legal proceedings.
“The category at greatest risk is precisely the one consumers most depend on: independent product criticism that holds manufacturers accountable for genuine safety and quality issues,” he told TechCrunch.
Madhav Sheth, CEO of local smartphone brand Ai+ and former Realme India head, defended stricter action against what he described as misinformation, saying on social media that “freedom of speech is not a license for defamation.” He warned of legal action against “fake news or unverified ‘exposés.’” His remarks drew criticism online from users who said they could discourage legitimate product reviews.
Others in the industry took a different view. Sunil Raina, managing director of Lava International, said on X: “When faced with criticism, you have two choices: intimidate or improve. One silences the feedback. The other silences the need for it.”
The case may signal a broader shift in how brands respond to online criticism in India. The creator cited above said they expect more such legal action in the future, as evolving rules around online content increase liability for creators and platforms — a trend reflected in recently proposed changes to India’s IT rules aimed at tightening oversight of online content.
Motorola did not respond to a request for comment. Google, Meta, and X also did not respond.