On 12 November, according to Bloomberg, Jane Doe had not thought for many years of his junior high school graduation until a law enforcement investigator came up with a picture of the celebration and started asking her about it。
She was only 14 years old, wearing a yellow dress with a smile and her arms on the shoulders of several friends. Some of her friends, she's barely contacted today。
The investigators told her that the adult brother of one of the classmates used an A.I. chat robot under Elon Musk Grok(C) TRANSLATING THIS ORIGINAL AND ORDINARY PHOTOGRAPH INTO CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE MATERIAL (CSAM). IN THE PICTURE THAT WAS CREATED, JANE DOE OF THE SECOND GRADE WAS NAKED AND SEXUALLY PROVOCATIVE. THESE IMAGES WERE SUBSEQUENTLY POSTED ON THE INTERNET。
She's generating an AI, Grok developer under the Mask flag xA In a class action brought, he participated in the case as Jane Doe 5。
In a petition, Jane Doe 5 wrote: “It is impossible to determine how many other child sex offenders may already have had images of Jane Doe 5 child sexual abuse, or how wide they are distributed online through dark web channels and applications”
In an interview a few days before leaving home for college, 18-year-old Jane Doe said, “These pictures have been circulated, and I can't do anything. That's what scares me the most.”
And she said, “This thing makes me feel like I want to give up everything.”
NOW, WITH AI, ANYONE CAN EASILY ACCESS REGULAR PHOTOS FROM PERSONAL SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNTS OR SCHOOL SITES AND TURN THEM INTO UNIMAGINABLE WITHIN SECONDSPorn ImageI don't know. Jane Doe 5 is just one of the young victims who are increasingly trying to hold xAI accountable by legal means, who believe that Gok helped users to produce these disturbing images。
IN DOING SO, THEY ARE FACED NOT ONLY WITH A COMPANY SUPPORTED BY THE WORLD'S RICHEST PEOPLE, BUT ALSO WITH A FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION THAT HAS NOT YET BEEN SETTLED IN THE AI ERA: WHEN CHAT ROBOTS PRODUCE CONTENT THAT INFRINGES ON OTHERS, WHO ULTIMATELY BEARS LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY? IS IT THE USER WHO GIVES INSTRUCTIONS TO AI OR THE COMPANY THAT DEVELOPS THE TECHNOLOGY? OR IS BOTH RESPONSIBLE
xAI states that, like competitors like OpenAI, Anthropic and Meta, it strictly prohibits users from using chat robots to produce such images and has taken technical measures to prevent users from generating relevant content. These problems are now a common problem for the whole AI industry。
However, since the launch of Grok in 2023, Mask has deliberately shaped it into a product that is less restrictive and more controversial than its competitors。
He encouraged users to use chat robots to generate pornographic AI content. Grok has launched a model called “Spicy”, which focuses on “bolder, more visible narratives” and supports the generation of images and videos that are not suitable for watching (NSFW) in the workplace。
xAI has indicated that the “Spicy” and “Unhinged” models are consistent with Glock's objective to pursue “the highest degree of truth”。
“These pictures have been circulated, and I can't do anything.”
Experts felt that this product positioning made Grock particularly popular among user groups that wished to break through Internet rules。
Earlier this year, the users of the X platform once used Grok to generate thousands of images per hour with sexual insinuations or to remove people's clothing. A third-party analysis found that the vast majority of the visual content generated by Grok belonged to this type。
Other investigations also found that many of the pictures appeared to involve minors. It is estimated that Grok allowed users to produce tens of thousands of child sexualized images。
The proliferation of such elements on platform X has triggered a strong global rebound. In January this year, X changed the photo generation function of Grok to that of a paid user under pressure of public opinion. However, critics argue that the initiative is simply turning a controversial function into a fee-paying product。
Mask blames the users of Grok for the production of the explicit pornography, not the product itself。
In January this year, he stated that he had “not heard of any naked pictures involving minors”. XAI subsequently indicated that Grok had been shut down and that it was capable of producing unconsensual sexualized images for any real person。
XAI refused to comment on this request for an interview on the grounds that the proceedings had not yet been completed。
In the spring of this year, the head of global government in the Americas, Wilfredo Fernández, stated: “XAI, with zero tolerance for the sexual exploitation of children, is determined to make its products a tool that those who seek to abuse minors cannot use.”
IN SEPTEMBER OF THIS YEAR, X INDICATED THAT SUCH INFORMATION WOULD BE REPORTED TO THE NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION NATIONAL CENTRE FOR MISSING AND ABUSED CHILDREN (NCMEC), WHICH WOULD TRANSMIT THE RELEVANT LEADS TO LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES。
Over the past few months, XAI has also prosecuted a number of individuals suspected of misuse of Grok, which endangers the safety of children。
AT THE SAME TIME, HOWEVER, THE COMPANY IS ALSO ACTIVELY CHALLENGING LAWS AIMED AT PROTECTING THE PUBLIC FROM UNAUTHORIZED AI PORNOGRAPHY。
This summer, XAI filed a lawsuit against Minnesota, United States, against a state law that targeted AI for the use of technology to process person photographs into naked images. Under the state law, AI companies that allow users to process such images may be penalized。
xAI argued in the litigation document that the law violated the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, as its scope of application “was far beyond the legislative objective itself and exposed a large number of constitutionally protected statements to civil liability and government sanctions”。
In October this year, the General Counsel for XAI and X, James Burnham, stated that the Minnesota law was “manifestly unconstitutional”。
He also stated: “Under the leadership of Elon Mask, we will always defend freedom of expression.”
The victims' last resort
The courts are increasingly becoming their last resort for these victims who seek security or psychological comfort。
The identity of the persons suspected of abusing Grok varied, including professional photographers, trusted friends, classmates and even family members. Some victims are even 6 years old。
In March of this year, several minors from Tennessee in the United States were charged with using Grok to remove their clothes from digital images or to synthesize them into explicit sexual positions。
Since then, the indictment has been amended to include more young victims, including Jane Doe 5 from Wisconsin。
A Tennessee plaintiff claimed that photographs from her yearbook 2025 were used to produce pornographic images. Another plaintiff stated that she used a personal photograph she had previously published on Instagram, in which she was wearing a blue bikini on vacation at the beach。
A plaintiff from Wyoming states that her stepfather uploaded a pornographic picture of her childhood to Grok. She was wearing a panda pattern T-shirt. The stepfather then used AI to produce thousands of painful synthetic images, some of which even depicted the rape or oral sex of the family member。
A number of minors from Arkansas in the United States and their parents have also been prosecuted on similar grounds this summer。
In California, on the other side of the United States, a former child sexual abuse survivor filed a national class action against XAI in August this year。
In her petition, she claimed that Grok ' s training data included pictures of her being raped in her preschool years. XAI uses these data to generate a large number of her-protocol-type new and terrible content and to use it as a basis for further production of other victims ' AI pornographic manipulations。
The petition called for a jury trial and filed a claim on behalf of “all persons in the United States who, while minors, had their pictures or videos tampered with and used in the production of child pornography by Grok”. Counsel estimates that as many as thousands of victims could have met this condition。
The prosecution documents show that because of the inability to trace and completely remove these painful images from the Internet, young victims can only continue to suffer the long-term harm caused by it。
Several Tennessee plaintiffs are now even afraid to attend their graduation. They fear that university recruits may see these false images online and mistakenly believe that their content is true. They also fear being followed。
Victims from Wisconsin and Wyoming have sustained mental health problems, including anxiety, depression and even suicidal thoughts。
The law firm Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, a lawyer representing several victims, Annika Martin, said: “You may be hurt in any unexpected direction.”
She further asked: “What does this mean for today's children? Can they, in the future, take and share photos that record the normal stages of life?”
She added that the harm was not limited to young women, especially when chat robot users themselves were minors。
MINORS MAY NOT BE AWARE THAT THE USE OF AI TO PRODUCE PORNOGRAPHIC IMAGES OF THEIR PEERS MAY ACTUALLY CONSTITUTE A FEDERAL CRIME。
Martin said, “In the past, this could have been just a boy drawing a few chest hoaxes in his classmate's yearbook. And now he's got another hand grenade to throw.”
Despite the increasing number of related proceedings, there have been no substantial consequences for the company。
Earlier this year, a joint letter was sent by the two-party State Attorneys General in 35 states of the United States requesting the company to take additional measures to address “the damage caused by this technology”。
In addition, in several important markets, state governments, federal governments and other national and regional regulators are investigating the company, focusing on whether it has not adequately regulated the sexual exploitation of children on the platform or has failed to report to the authorities in a timely manner。
Regulatory review of Grok has led to the temporary suspension of the service or the restriction of the functioning of its products in some countries, but to date the investigation has not resulted in significant fines or substantial regulatory penalties。
- “What does this mean for today's children? Can they, in the future, take and share photos that record the normal stages of life?”
PART OF THE REASON FOR THIS IS THAT AI TECHNOLOGY HAS EVOLVED AT A RATE THAT IS BEYOND THE REGULATORY PROCESS. THIS HAS NOT ONLY GIVEN RISE TO A SERIES OF IMPORTANT POLICY ISSUES, BUT HAS ALSO INVOLVED A MAJOR GLOBAL COMPETITION FOR TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATION, WHICH AI IS AT THE HEART OF。
Mask has unparalleled wealth, and its commercial empire includes a SpaceX listing program that is expected to set a record record, which also gives him sufficient resources to deal with legal and regulatory shocks。
Unless SpaceX loses a profitable government contract in the United States or abroad because of these issues, investors do not seem to be concerned about the risks involved。
According to Luke Rahbari, Chief Executive Officer of Investment Consulting, the recent reconciliation between the competitor Meta and the State Attorneys General could serve as a reference for measuring the potential impact of litigation or regulatory action on SpaceX。
In August this year, Meta entered into a settlement agreement with the Attorney-General of the States of the United States for a total of $18 billion (the current exchange rate is approximately RMB 120,380 million) for alleged violations of child safety regulations。
Rahabari called the settlement a “one ounce”. He said, “If this criterion or measure were taken, the ultimate impact would be very limited.”
New issues, old law
GENERATING AI MAY BE A NEW TECHNOLOGY, BUT THE CORE LAWS INVOLVED IN THESE PROCEEDINGS HAVE EXISTED FOR DECADES。
Several plaintiffs filed claims under a federal law called the Masha's Law. This law, which has been in force for decades, allows victims of child sexual exploitation to seek financial compensation and other legal remedies from those who harm them。
Section 230 of the U.S. Communications Regulation Act may also play an important role in these cases。
This controversial and decades-old law provides, inter alia, that web-based platforms usually do not have to be held legally responsible for content published or uploaded by users, and that the responsibility for this lies primarily with content publishers. It is this provision that allows websites such as YouTube, Facebook and X to be largely exempt from legal responsibility for content published by users and to develop rapidly。
Mask has always stressed that responsibility should rest with the users of the product and not with the product itself。
He said: “Grok will not be a picture of itself, but only if requested by the user.”
However, according to Martin, the lawyer representing the victim, the nature of these cases is different, and article 230 of the Communications Regulatory Code does not exempt XAI from liability for illegal content created by Grok itself。
According to Martin: “The user uploads all normal photographs of people in complete clothing, completely harmless, but the model turns them into child sexual abuse material. If it wasn't for Grok, it wouldn't have been possible for those people to make those pictures and videos.”
ONCE UPON A TIME, JANE DOE ONLY USED AI AS A TOOL TO HELP WITH HOMEWORK OCCASIONALLY. SHE STATED THAT SHE HAD BEEN AN EXTRAORDINARY PERSON AND LOVED SPORTS。
However, in the latter part of high school, she spent most of her time at home, moving away from her friends and keeping the nightmare deep in her heart。
She said, “This is all in my mind.”
Today, she has begun to receive psychological care, which is the first time in her life that she has sought professional psychological help. She was also trying to adapt to university life, but the related anxiety had not disappeared。
Investigators may inform her of these altered images every time they re-emerge online. She is both afraid and unwilling to ignore this possibility。
Jane Doe said, “The best thing I want to do is to get more people to pay attention to this and to let you know that this is happening and that anyone can be the victim.”
She did not retreat in the face of the possibility of facing up with Mask and her large team of lawyers. She said, “Grok must take responsibility for letting these things happen.”