Labour MP Jess Asato has announced that she has initiated a legal test case against Elon Musk’s xAI. The case will take to task Grok AI’s creation of fake, pornographic and derogatory content seen in January.

Attracting particular condemnation is the fact that the AI tool produced a demeaning, offensive and frankly, dangerous video which showed the MP:

being chloroformed and prepared for sexual assault.

Grok AI and its prolific creation of sexualised content, including of young children, has prompted widespread anger as it became clear the business model was happy to make money out of the most abusive and sinister views held by paedophiles, perverts, and rapists.

It then comes as little surprise that others affected by Grok have now joined the legal test case against Musk following Jess Asato’s decision to confront the billionaire head-on.

The legal case specifically argues that xAI violated data protection law and breached Asato’s private information when it permitted the images to be created.

New claimants seek to sue Elon Musk’s xAI after Labour MP’s test case
Jess Asato’s lawyer says others want to take action over demeaning sexualised material created by Grok AI toolhttps://t.co/XYOs5Lutlw

— dave lawrence (@dave43law) June 5, 2026

Musk faces another legal challenge

Back in January, Musk’s AI tool Grok generated approximately 3 million sexualised pictures in less than two weeks, which researchers said:

became an industrial-scale machine for the production of sexual abuse material.

One concerning aspect to this is the fact that the AI tool had no issues with requests such as “remove her clothes” or “put her in a bikini”. In reality, the tool will generate almost anything a user asks for – including these sexualised images of women without consent. Subsequently, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) launched an inquiry into Grok AI and the images it has produced.

Justifiably, many women feel their privacy is being undermined. After all, even when victims know the images are fake, they can still look real enough to humiliate, demean, and leave people feeling exposed. Let’s face it, if it didn’t, these kinds of men wouldn’t be so interested.

Moreover, its creation of child sexual abuse content drives home the fact that this tool has played into incredibly sinister, pervasive, and perverted mentalities amongst abusive men. When women and girls already face rising levels of abuse and violence, this increased threat financed by a soon-to-be trillionaire is a worrying sign for the direction of travel in the West.

Therefore, it is restoring to see victims of this abuse stepping forward to hold the tech giant to account for the abuse he has fostered and facilitated.

The legal director of the law firm AWO, Ravi Naik, confirmed to the Guardian he is acting for “multiple individuals”, and stated on the firm’s website:

At its heart, this case is about a single principle – that AI developers must answer for the way they design their tools. Where there is a wrong, the law must provide a remedy – and that is as true of artificial intelligence as of anything else.

No one should be subjected to abuse like this, and no one should have to instruct a lawyer to get images like these taken down.

This content existed because of design choices made by xAI, and technology of this kind does not simply happen. It is built, and it is built deliberately. Grok was designed in a way that permitted the creation of non-consensual, sexualised and misogynistic images of women – and that outcome was a choice, not a glitch.

This is one of the first claims to test liability for the design of an AI system, and we hope it will make it clear to AI developers that safety cannot be an afterthought.

Asato: ‘Literally strips your clothes off and makes you vulnerable’

Asato has spoken to the “psychologically distressing” impact it has as a woman to have fake nude images made without consent, and insists that her legal challenge is necessary to ensure that AI companies have a responsibility in what it’s products enable, stating:

Grok created deepfake pornography and sexualised content which harmed thousands of women and children.

Its ability is not an accident, nor misuse, it is a design choice by its creators. In launching this case, I am pursuing accountability for those choices.

I hope this legal action also gives voice to the thousands of victims in the UK, women, girls and horrifically even children, who were abused by Grok. I am calling on anyone in the UK who experienced the misuse of their image or video by Grok to come forward and support our legal claim.

This escalating abuse targeting Asato came after she called for the introduction of an anti-nudification act to combat these sexualised attacks.

Let’s be honest, serious – and thus proven – concerns exist that men will misuse this AI tool if allowed to. Even if Musk insists that is not its intended purpose, creeps can still exploit it to create and spread harmful material under the radar. Especially when its creators do nothing to stop it and instead, draw profits from such sordid interests.

Going further, a particular worry is that when tech platforms don’t properly guard against this kind of pervasive use, it starts to normalise it. And once that happens, it becomes easier for sexualised harassment and abuse to spread, escalate, and feel even more acceptable online. Needless to say, as we see generally in society, what becomes normalised online soon becomes normalised in daily life.

As a result, women, girls and children are left increasingly exposed to harm – and one of the world’s most powerful men is enabling it.

The government must be made to take REAL action

Whether Musk will take heed of this legal challenge awaits to be seen – he didn’t seem concerned back in January when this happened. In fact, he shared hateful abuse fired at Asato after she objected to the harm caused by the ‘bikinification’ trend. Signalling his escalatory influence, that is when the deepfake video showing her being chloroformed was produced and thus replied to Musk’s retweet.

It remains to be seen whether the government will show any real backbone in holding tech giants like Musk to account. Even while criticising his “extreme personal views”, Peter Kyle still found time to describe him as a “successful innovator and commercialiser of innovation”. Last year, he even stated the government must “respect and engage with” Musk who he called an “unignorable force”.

That kind of mixed messaging – condemning on one hand while praising on the other – does little to suggest ministers are prepared to take on real power.

Once again, a powerful and controversial figure gets wrapped up in talk of being “complex”, rather than being judged on the real-world impact of his actions. If the government keeps talking out of both sides of its mouth, it’s hard to see how it will ever seriously rein in Big Tech.

Featured image via Getty/Joe Raedle

By Maddison Wheeldon

From Canary via This RSS Feed.