Jess Asato is taking Musk’s company to court over Grok deepfakes

This is according to Reuters, citing documents filed with the High Court in London.

Jess Asato represents the ruling Labour Party in the British Parliament. In June, she filed a lawsuit against xAI – Elon Musk’s company, which developed the Grok chatbot.

Musk himself is not a personal defendant in this case. The lawsuit is directed against xAI as the developer and operator of the system that allowed users to create manipulated images.

According to the MP, following her public criticism of Musk and Grok, users began creating fake sexualised material featuring her face. These included images of Asato in a bikini and a video in which she is allegedly drugged with chloroform and prepared for sexual assault.

“Grok generated pornographic deepfakes and sexualised content that caused harm to thousands of women and children. This capability is not an accident or merely a case of misuse – it is the result of decisions made by the developers,” Asato stated after filing the lawsuit.

The MP accuses xAI of misusing private information and breaching UK data protection legislation. She claims that Grok’s architecture, training and configuration enabled the system to generate sexualised material featuring images of real people.

In new court documents, Asato is seeking an order requiring xAI to implement “effective and permanent technical measures” to prevent Grok from generating manipulated images featuring her without her consent. This involves not only the removal of material that has already been published, but also preventing its regeneration.

The MP’s representatives drew attention to Grok’s internal guidelines. According to them, the system was instructed not to assist in criminal activity, but was permitted to generate adult or violent fictional content. The lawyers believe that this combination of rules left room for the misuse of photographs of real people.

Asato’s lawsuit may have implications beyond xAI. Her lawyers are seeking to establish that the developer of a generative system should be held accountable for technical decisions that make the creation of illegal or harmful content foreseeable.

British courts have not previously applied data protection and privacy legislation to an artificial intelligence developer in this specific way. The outcome of the case could determine whether it is sufficient for companies to prohibit harmful queries in their terms of use, or whether they must technically prevent the creation of such material.

The scandal surrounding Grok began in late 2025 and intensified in early 2026. Users discovered that the chatbot could alter photographs of real people, depicting them naked, in revealing clothing or in sexualised poses. Among those whose images were used without consent were women and children.

In January, xAI announced restrictions on image-editing functions. The company stated that Grok should not generate intimate images of real people without their consent. However, checks carried out after the restrictions were introduced showed that some of the safeguards could be circumvented.

In March, a court in the Netherlands had already banned xAI from creating and distributing sexualised images of people without their consent. The company faced a fine of 100,000 euros for each day of non-compliance. The court concluded that the restrictions put in place by xAI were insufficient.

In the UK, Grok’s operations are being scrutinised by two regulators simultaneously. The Information Commissioner’s Office has launched an investigation into a possible breach of data protection legislation. The regulator Ofcom is examining the X platform for compliance with the Online Safety Act.

The European Commission has launched a separate investigation into X. This is intended to determine whether the platform has complied with the requirements of the Digital Services Act following the circulation of sexualised deepfakes created by Grok.

xAI has not provided Reuters with a comment regarding Asato’s claims. The company has also not yet filed a formal response to the claim with the court. Therefore, the MP’s allegations and her assessment of Grok’s technical solutions currently constitute the claimant’s position, which is subject to judicial review.