said<\/a> in a complaint filed Monday in the US District Court for the District of Minnesota. It\u2019s presumptively unconstitutional and must be overturned unless the state can show it\u2019s narrowly tailored to advance a compelling government interest through the least restrictive means available, the company said.<\/p>\nX.AI didn\u2019t dispute that the state has valid interests in prohibiting the dissemination of artificially generated nude images of people without their consent, but said the Minnesota law extended \u201cfar beyond that goal, exposing a wide array of protected speech to civil liability and government sanctions.\u201d <\/p>\n
The provision, which takes effect Aug. 1, threatens companies with fines up to $500,000 each time a user generates or alters an image depicting a person\u2019s genitals, breasts, buttocks, or other sensitive areas, the complaint said. <\/p>\n
It\u2019s a strict liability statute that applies regardless of measures the company takes to prevent its Grok Imagine and other tools from being used in this fashion, the complaint also said, and the law contains no safe harbor or makes any exception for images the company itself prohibits.<\/p>\n
The provision affects a wide range of speech, the complaint said. \u201cSatirical images restored or animated family photographs, and creative projects that Minnesota users could have made by editing images with Grok Imagine will be affected\u2014not because xAI\u2019s policies permit misuse (they forbid it), but because HF 1606 leaves xAI no choice,\u201d it said. <\/p>\n
\u201cUsing AI to generate nude images of people against their will is appalling,\u201d said Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison (D). \u201cAI nudification robs the target of their dignity and can cause immense harm on an emotional, personal, and professional level.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThere are plenty of worthy debates to have about AI policy,\u201d but this isn\u2019t one of them, he said. Ellison added that his office will review the complaint once it\u2019s been served and will respond in court.<\/p>\n
Stinson LLP and Eimer Stahl LLP represent X.AI.<\/p>\n
The case is X.AI, LLC v. Ellison<\/a>, D. Minn., No. 26-cv-3425, complaint filed 7\/27\/26.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Minnesota\u2019s \u201cnudification\u201d law punishing artificial intelligence platforms for letting users alter people\u2019s images to depict \u201cintimate parts\u201d is…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":121934,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[25,11656,42681,2899],"class_list":["post-121933","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-xai","tag-artificial-intelligence","tag-freedom-of-speech","tag-strict-liability","tag-xai"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/121933","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=121933"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/121933\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/121934"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=121933"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=121933"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=121933"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}