New DelhiMotorola’s India suit targets reviews not yet written.
Motorola’s India unit sued X, YouTube, Instagram, and 4 other platforms to remove existing and future posts it deems defamatory.
Digital rights activists warn the dynamic-injunction mechanism would template similar prior-restraint orders across South and Southeast Asia.
Sources: Rest of World
WHAT A DYNAMIC INJUNCTION IS
A standard injunction names specific URLs to take down. A dynamic injunction binds platforms to remove future content matching a pattern — same defendant, same subject matter — without going back to court. The judicial order, once granted, runs forward in time.
THE DELHI HIGH COURT ORIGIN
India's dynamic injunction was invented in UTV Software v. 1337X (2019), a copyright case targeting piracy mirror sites. The court reasoned that whack-a-mole takedowns were ineffective when blocked sites simply reappeared at new domains. The doctrine has since migrated from copyright into defamation, trademark, and personality-rights cases.
PRIOR RESTRAINT, THE OLD DOCTRINE
Anglo-American free-speech law has treated prior restraint — banning speech before it occurs — as the most disfavored form of censorship since Blackstone in the 1760s. Post-publication liability lets the speaker speak and face consequences; prior restraint silences speech that may never have been unlawful at all.
INTERMEDIARY LIABILITY, THE INDIAN VERSION
India's IT Rules 2021 require platforms to remove flagged content within 36 hours or lose safe-harbor protection under Section 79 of the IT Act. Combined with dynamic injunctions, the structure pushes platforms toward over-removal: the cost of leaving content up is unlimited liability; the cost of taking it down is near zero.
WHY SOUTH ASIA MATTERS
Indian High Court jurisprudence is influential across common-law jurisdictions in the region — Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Singapore — whose courts cite Indian precedent on internet regulation. A doctrine that hardens in Delhi often appears in Dhaka or Kuala Lumpur within a few years.
THE CORPORATE PLAINTIFF SHIFT
Defamation law evolved to protect individuals from reputational ruin. Corporations using the same tools to suppress product reviews and consumer criticism is a relatively recent extension — and one most jurisdictions limit through anti-SLAPP statutes. India has no anti-SLAPP law.