Elon Musk’s xAI is trying to sue its way out of a Grok reckoning
Elon Musk’s xAI is trying to sue its way out of a Grok reckoning
Elon Musk’s xAI is trying to sue its way out of a Grok reckoning as arrests of Grok users accused of making child sex abuse materials (CSAM) have triggered lawsuits from kids to sue xAI to force changes to the tool to block harmful outputs.
埃隆·马斯克（Elon Musk）旗下的 xAI 公司正试图通过诉讼来摆脱 Grok 带来的清算。由于 Grok 用户因制作儿童性虐待材料（CSAM）而被捕，引发了受害者儿童对 xAI 的起诉，旨在迫使该公司修改工具以拦截有害输出。
Earlier this month, xAI started suing users who are allegedly circumventing its safeguards to generate AI CSAM, seemingly hopeful that an early court win will guarantee it’s not liable for supposedly user-generated content.
本月初，xAI 开始起诉那些涉嫌绕过安全防护措施以生成 AI CSAM 的用户，似乎希望通过早期的胜诉来确保其无需为所谓的“用户生成内容”承担法律责任。
For its next move, the Grok maker pointed to that lawsuit in a complaint filed Monday, accusing Minnesota of trying to force changes to Grok and Grok Imagine by enforcing a ban on nudification technology that would guarantee that xAI was liable for the harmful outputs, as well as outputs that allegedly weren’t sexualizing people without consent.
在周一提交的一份诉状中，Grok 的开发者将上述诉讼作为论据，指责明尼苏达州试图通过强制执行针对“去衣技术”（nudification technology）的禁令，来迫使 Grok 和 Grok Imagine 进行修改。xAI 认为，该禁令将确保其必须为有害输出，以及那些被指控并未未经同意将他人性化的输出承担责任。
According to xAI, suing a Grok user is proof that xAI is already doing everything in its power to punish bad actors, and therefore, Grok deserves safe harbor from Minnesota’s ban.
xAI 表示，起诉 Grok 用户证明了该公司已尽其所能惩罚不良行为者，因此，Grok 理应在明尼苏达州的禁令中获得“避风港”保护。
Minnesota’s law—which is due to take effect August 1—threatens firms like xAI with fines of up to $500,000 for every single harmful output discovered in the state. As xAI explained, that adds up quickly, considering that some Grok users are accused of making thousands of images of single victims.
明尼苏达州的法律将于 8 月 1 日生效，该法律规定，在州内发现的每一项有害输出，都将对 xAI 等公司处以最高 50 万美元的罚款。正如 xAI 所解释的那样，考虑到一些 Grok 用户被指控针对单一受害者制作了数千张图像，罚款金额将迅速累积。
Most recently, xAI was sued last week after tipping off cops to a well-known Arkansas child photographer who allegedly used Grok to sexualize images he took of hundreds of clients. In a complaint from a 10-year-old Jane Doe, it’s alleged the photographer made hundreds of images of Doe, and thousands of images and videos of others kids.
最近，在 xAI 向警方举报了一名阿肯色州的知名儿童摄影师后，该公司于上周遭到起诉。该摄影师涉嫌利用 Grok 将他为数百名客户拍摄的照片进行性化处理。在一份由一名 10 岁受害者（化名 Jane Doe）提交的诉状中，指控该摄影师制作了数百张关于 Doe 的图像，以及数千张关于其他儿童的图像和视频。
Doe’s lawyer told Ars that many of those kids are preparing to file their own lawsuits, and those claims could end up being added to a potential class action filed in March by young girls in Tennessee.
Doe 的律师告诉 Ars，许多受害儿童正准备提起诉讼，这些索赔最终可能会被合并到田纳西州年轻女孩于 3 月份发起的潜在集体诉讼中。
Doing the math, xAI seemingly panicked, arguing that fining AI tool makers for each output is excessive, particularly since Minnesota’s law has no distribution requirement and potentially fines xAI for images that only the user saw.
经过计算，xAI 似乎陷入了恐慌，辩称对 AI 工具开发者按每一项输出进行罚款是过度的，特别是考虑到明尼苏达州的法律没有“传播”要求，甚至可能对仅由用户本人查看的图像也对 xAI 进行罚款。
“A company whose users request just ten images in violation of the statute would face exposure up to $5 million in civil penalties alone. A company with a thousand violative images could be fined up to $500 million. And a business whose users created a hundred thousand images covered by [the law] (not at all unlikely for a publicly available program with millions of users generating billions of images) could owe an eye-popping $50 billion dollars.”
“一家用户请求了仅十张违规图像的公司，仅民事罚款就将面临高达 500 万美元的风险。一家拥有 1000 张违规图像的公司可能被罚款高达 5 亿美元。而一家用户创建了 10 万张受该法律管辖图像的企业（对于一个拥有数百万用户、生成数十亿图像的公开程序来说，这完全有可能发生），可能需要支付高达 500 亿美元的惊人罚款。”
Additionally, the law gives victims a right to sue xAI over any individual output, which increases xAI’s financial risks. The penalties are so severe, xAI said in its lawsuit that it was finally preparing to update Grok to block harmful outputs after more than six months of backlash and probes pressuring the firm to tighten its safeguards.
此外，该法律赋予受害者就任何单一输出起诉 xAI 的权利，这增加了 xAI 的财务风险。xAI 在诉讼中表示，由于处罚过于严厉，在经历了六个多月要求公司加强安全防护的强烈抵制和调查后，它终于准备更新 Grok 以拦截有害输出。
“Confronted with $500,000-per-image strict liability and no safe harbor, xAI has no practical choice but to restrict Grok Imagine’s image-editing features in various ways when the statute takes effect on August 1, 2026,” xAI argued. “Protected speech freely available before the law takes effect will thus be chilled.”
“面对每张图像 50 万美元的严格责任且没有避风港保护，当该法规于 2026 年 8 月 1 日生效时，xAI 除了以各种方式限制 Grok Imagine 的图像编辑功能外，别无选择，” xAI 辩称。“因此，在法律生效前可自由获取的受保护言论将受到寒蝉效应的影响。”
However, xAI would prefer to leave Grok unchanged and continue relying on its terms of use stipulating that users could be banned for using Grok to make CSAM or other kinds of non-consensual intimate images (NCII), its complaint said. “But for [the law] and its penalties, xAI would continue to offer the editing feature exactly as it does today,” xAI said.
然而，xAI 在诉状中表示，它更倾向于保持 Grok 不变，并继续依赖其使用条款，即规定用户若使用 Grok 制作 CSAM 或其他类型的非自愿私密图像（NCII）将被封禁。“如果不是因为该法律及其处罚，xAI 将会像今天一样继续提供该编辑功能，” xAI 表示。
Nudification law is unconstitutional, xAI says. To defend Grok, Musk’s firm is turning to the First Amendment, arguing that Minnesota’s law is a “clumsy attempt to prohibit ‘nudification’” that “sweeps in a wide range of fully protected speech.”
xAI 称“去衣法”违宪。为了捍卫 Grok，马斯克的公司转向了美国宪法第一修正案，辩称明尼苏达州的法律是“禁止‘去衣’的拙劣尝试”，它“涵盖了广泛的、受完全保护的言论”。
That includes nude images generated with “artistic, scientific, political, satirical, educational, medical, or religious value,” xAI argued. Most egregiously, “liability attaches even if the depicted persons consented—or created the image themselves—and even if the image is never shared,” xAI emphasized in its complaint.
xAI 辩称，这包括具有“艺术、科学、政治、讽刺、教育、医疗或宗教价值”的裸体图像。最严重的是，xAI 在诉状中强调：“即使被描绘者同意——或者图像本身就是由他们自己创建的——甚至即使图像从未被分享，法律责任依然存在。”
Minnesota has less restrictive means to block harms from nudification, xAI argued, while claiming that the Take It Down Act already protected users from harms of distribution. If the court agrees, Minnesota could be enjoined from enforcing the law against any nudification app.
xAI 辩称，明尼苏达州有更少限制性的手段来阻止“去衣”带来的伤害，并声称《Take It Down 法案》已经保护了用户免受传播带来的伤害。如果法院同意，明尼苏达州可能会被禁止对任何“去衣”应用执行该法律。
Without such an injunction, “providers may well have no choice but to alter their services in Minnesota rather than run the risk that users will evade their controls,” xAI argued. “And that would hamper all uses of AI image-generation tools, including those that [the law] does not purport to regulate.”
“如果没有这样的禁令，提供商可能别无选择，只能改变其在明尼苏达州的服务，而不是冒着用户规避其控制的风险，” xAI 辩称。“这将阻碍 AI 图像生成工具的所有用途，包括那些该法律并未声称要监管的用途。”
But Minnesota thinks that it has the right to block images at the source before they can be distributed and cause lifelong harms to kids. Asked for comment, the office of Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison provided a statement to Ars, confirming that Minnesota will likely defend the law to prevent abhorrent outputs that lawsuits claim are traumatizing victims and their families nationwide.
但明尼苏达州认为，它有权在图像传播并对儿童造成终身伤害之前，从源头上拦截它们。在被问及评论时，明尼苏达州总检察长基思·埃里森（Keith Ellison）的办公室向 Ars 发表声明，确认明尼苏达州可能会捍卫该法律，以防止那些诉讼称正在对全国受害者及其家庭造成创伤的令人厌恶的输出。
“We’re waiting to be served and will review the lawsuit and response in Court,” Ellison said. “But I know that using AI to generate nude images of people against their will is appalling. There are plenty of worthy debates to have about AI policy. This is not one of them. AI nudification robs the target of their dignity and can cause immense harm on an emotional, personal, and professional level.”
“我们正在等待传票，并将会在法庭上审查诉讼和回应，” 埃里森说。“但我知道，利用 AI 在违背他人意愿的情况下生成裸体图像是令人震惊的。关于 AI 政策，有很多值得讨论的话题，但这绝不是其中之一。AI 去衣剥夺了目标的尊严，并可能在情感、个人和职业层面上造成巨大的伤害。”
xAI did not respond to Ars’ request to comment. Thighs, male breasts aren’t “intimate,” xAI says. xAI’s arguments mostly focus on how Minnesota defines “intimate parts.” Musk’s firm prefers definitions found in anti-revenge porn laws like the Take It Down Act, which xAI said relied on a narrower definition to criminalize distribution of both real and AI-generated “intimate”
xAI 没有回应 Ars 的置评请求。xAI 称，大腿和男性胸部不属于“私密部位”。xAI 的论点主要集中在明尼苏达州如何定义“私密部位”上。马斯克的公司更倾向于使用《Take It Down 法案》等反复仇色情法律中的定义，xAI 称这些法律依赖于更狭窄的定义，从而将传播真实和 AI 生成的“私密”内容定为犯罪。