r/law • u/Malor777 • 21h ago
Legal News Child sexual abuse survivor alleges Elon Musk's AI chatbot used photos of her to generate new illegal images | Musk denied he was aware Grok ever produced 'any naked underage images'
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/sep/03/elon-musk-ai-grok-child-porn-lawsuit356
u/kon--- 21h ago
Without proof I'm just going to put it out there that Musk is the source of underage content.
101
u/spez_eats_nazi_ass 21h ago
Sounds like the feds should be investigating him.
40
u/soupseasonbestseason 20h ago
but a.i. child porn is totes a facet of free speech.
22
u/spez_eats_nazi_ass 20h ago
He should test that in criminal court and see how it plays out.
10
u/SwordfishOfDamocles 20h ago
I'm afraid he would win.
https://www.wearegreenbay.com/news/local-news/wisconsin-man-wins-case/
7
u/trysten-9001 18h ago
That’s completely different than what the case against musk would look like. That’s generating it (which should still be illegal.) Musk trained the model. Keeping CP is a crime.
1
u/SwordfishOfDamocles 17h ago edited 17h ago
Right, but at this point xAI has removed the original content, but has AI generated images that were generated from CSAM which is where it gets tricky because they (like every social media company) get flooded with CSAM that gets filtered out, but for some reason it was still fed to grok. So the question will be are these derivatives considered CSAM based on the origins or will they fall under a similar 1st amendment argument.
1
u/DragonTacoCat 19h ago
Yeah the weird situation this is in, is AI isn't art but it isn't 'real' either so it falls into a weird pit of 'what do we do with it and laws aren't moving fast enough to close loopholes.
Not just with this but a lot of other things as well. Any normal person would agree this is bad and should be illegal but until a law is in place to charge someone with it law enforcement and the courts are tied up.
1
7
u/Kaffe-Mumriken 20h ago
The feds with beastiality on their hard drives and receipts from prostitutes
5
5
4
u/Do_itsch 20h ago
He probably has all of them on a harddrive together with the stolen gouvernement data from DOuGE and the Epstein files.
Find the harddrive to find the truth..
3
u/j-doe411 18h ago
100% he knew, and he was on Epstein’s island. Also, he has destroyed twitter so I bet that’s how he is getting more engagement
69
u/BroseppeVerdi 21h ago
If so, then he's the last one. The rest of us seem pretty well aware of this fact.
7
u/Polkas_with_wolves 11h ago
Mafia tactic. He makes sure he is kept unaware of these details so he can say he was unaware.
77
u/Hoss-Bonaventure_CEO 21h ago
It seems odd that he specifies naked.
12
u/Evil-Cun 20h ago
Kinda sad that every wealthy suit wearing alpha-inheritant (inheritant isn’t an English word and it’s time to make it one)
Oops the brackets got in the way.
It’s sad that every alpha-inheritent you meet is an absolute expert on sex laws and when it’s legal to get that poon all implications’d out.
8
69
u/Neither_Contest7324 20h ago
I'm a little confused. He claims he doesn't know Grok ever produced any naked underage images but he also went out of his way to claim the laws against using AI to create said images shouldn't be allowed?
35
u/GammaFan 20h ago
“You can’t stop my application from producing this thing I don’t know it produces, it’s free speech for a bot to generate nude images of people including children even though I don’t know it can do that!”
What a batshit argument and awful fucking reality to live in that we’re stuck hearing him say this shit from the comfort of the free world instead of rambling from behind bars.
13
u/Neither_Contest7324 20h ago
Plus he says this quite a while after they had to take Grok offline for a while because it was producing just these kinds of images.
4
u/GammaFan 20h ago
Yup. Once again it’s demonstrable that he’s lying. That or the special K is finally rotting his brain
7
u/cewillir 20h ago
I think the aclu is backing him on that because they think the scope of the laws are too broad
2
u/Neither_Contest7324 20h ago
If they are I'm hoping it's for the same reason the judge ruled the First Amendment protects it and that's because the laws need to be updated not because they actually think these pictures are fine like Elon does.
1
u/James_Solomon 15h ago edited 15h ago
The fact that they are using CSAM to train makes it very much different from previous cases involving stuff like loli.
14
u/Background_Fix9430 10h ago
Has anyone advanced a theory that LLMs ("AI") always have to participate in harming children if they are capable of producing CSAM because that means they had to be trained on CSAM or CSAM adjacent material?
9
u/Nbdyhere 9h ago
I made this argument at a round table. These models don’t think; it’s literally garbage in garbage out. You train a model on a million pictures of dogs with brown fur and ask to generate a cat with white fur it will give you something, but it won’t be a cat.
If they are accurate depictions it generating it from something it ingested.
1
u/_Zambayoshi_ 4h ago
I wouldn't be surprised if Musk had Grok designed to produce the stuff. This is the guy that begged (unsuccessfully) to go to Epstein Island ...
1
u/audiomagnate 1h ago
I know hardly anything about AI, but I do know Grok makes child photography. You would think the owner of the company would know too.
•
u/AutoModerator 21h ago
All new posts must have a brief statement from the user submitting explaining how their post relates to law or the courts in a response to this comment. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A BRIEF RESPONSE MAY RESULT IN REMOVAL. Please post your statement as a reply to this automated message.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.