Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence firm, xAI, is requesting the public identification of four people who allegedly had deepfake sexualized images created of them using the Grok chatbot — including one apparently targeted with sexualized deepfake images of them as a child, according to recently filed court documents reported by WIRED.
The Lawsuit and Pseudonymous Plaintiffs
On May 29, the four main claimants in a federal class-action lawsuit — currently identified as South Carolina Doe, South Carolina Roe, New Jersey Doe, and Ohio Doe — described in affidavits the emotional distress they had suffered after the alleged deepfakes were created earlier this year. The four fear further online harassment and doxing if forced to use their real names in the lawsuit against xAI, the documents allege.
The class-action lawsuit was initially filed in January with one pseudonymous lead claimant, referred to as Jane Doe. A judge in the US District Court for the Northern District of California approved an order allowing them to proceed anonymously. The case was later refiled with the four pseudonymous plaintiffs at the start of May, with Jane Doe becoming South Carolina Doe.
- South Carolina Doe — originally Jane Doe
- South Carolina Roe — new plaintiff
- New Jersey Doe — new plaintiff
- Ohio Doe — new plaintiff
Statements in court records say those suing xAI would make their names and personal information known to the company but wanted to use pseudonyms in public to protect their privacy, to not be publicly linked to the images, and to reduce potential for further harassment. Deepfake images of the plaintiffs were not included in any of the public legal filings.
xAI’s Motion to Strip Anonymity
In the middle of May, xAI filed two motions with the same federal district court asking the judge to overturn the ruling allowing pseudonyms. The documents state that under civil court laws, which can have some exceptions, cases must name all parties involved. Law360 first reported on xAI’s motions.
In the motions, xAI’s lawyers claim that real names should be used because there is a public interest in the identities of those suing the company. They claimed that no evidence has been put forward for any specific further harm or threats to individuals in the case. And they also say that because deepfake images will not be made public as part of the lawsuit, this should assuage any privacy concerns.
“Factoring out the deepfake image itself — as it will remain under seal — there is nothing inherently stigmatizing about revealing the fact that a deepfake image was created of South Carolina Doe without revealing the image itself,” the lawyers wrote in one of their May 15 filings. “As a result, this case simply does not involve the types of compelling privacy interests traditionally recognized as requiring pseudonymity.”
Neither xAI nor lawyers representing the company responded to WIRED’s request for comment about the case.
Response from Plaintiffs’ Legal Team
Sophia Rios, a lawyer representing the individuals for legal firm Berger Montague, wrote in a recent filing: “Having stripped them of their clothes, xAI now seeks to strip Plaintiffs of their pseudonyms in an obvious effort to intimidate Plaintiffs into dropping the litigation by compounding the same harms that they seek to remedy.” Rios added, “Asking this Court to reverse itself, xAI suggests that the abuse it has perpetrated is no big deal.” Rios tells WIRED she is unable to comment beyond what is written in the filings.
Broader Context of Grok Deepfake Misuse
In January, use of the Musk-owned Grok chatbot caused global outrage as scores of men used the generative AI system to create fake images of women “undressed” and in bikinis. The images, which were posted on X, also included sexualized images of apparent children. Analysis from the Center for Countering Digital Hate claimed Grok was used to create around 3 million sexualized images over just 11 days, with 23,000 of those potentially including children. Facing a wave of lawsuits and regulation around the world, SpaceX, which now owns xAI, has set aside more than $500 million to deal with the fallout.
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Sexualized images created via Grok (over 11 days) | ~3 million |
| Images potentially including children | ~23,000 |
| Funds set aside by SpaceX for fallout | >$500 million |
| Lead law firm for plaintiffs | Berger Montague |
The case highlights the legal and reputational risks for companies deploying generative AI. For enterprise technology leaders, this underscores the need for robust content filters, safety guardrails, and clear policies to prevent misuse. The outcome of this pseudonymity battle could influence how courts balance victims’ privacy against defendants’ rights in AI-related litigation.
Sources:
