Ivy Caldwell
X has announced a significant update to its Terms of Service that all users must accept to continue using the application.
The revised terms include a clarification that X’s legal disputes will now be “resolved in Texas courts under Texas law.” This change aligns with X’s current status as part of SpaceX, which is predominantly based in Texas.
Another important update pertains to user responsibilities. The new terms specify that users are accountable for their use of X’s services, including functionalities that perform automated actions on their behalf.
This update reflects X owner Elon Musk’s previous statements indicating that individuals who generate illegal content using its xAI tools will bear personal liability for such actions.
Additionally, there is a noteworthy inclusion in X’s terms:
“Waiver of Class Action and Jury Trial Rights: In accordance with applicable law, we have revised our Terms to indicate that both you and X waive the right to a jury trial. similar to our previous Terms, you and X waive the right to initiate or participate in any class, collective, or representative legal actions against one another. This waiver applies to all users and, where legally permissible, extends to our corporate affiliates.”
This is particularly significant as X is currently facing a class action lawsuit initiated by a group of survivors of sexual abuse, who contend that xAI failed to prevent the creation and dissemination of non-consensual sexualized imagery and child sexual abuse material via its Grok chatbot.
According to The Guardian, at least one plaintiff has alleged that xAI incorporated existing CSAM (child sexual abuse material) content as a reference point in the training of Grok.
As stated in the complaint: “By utilizing pre-existing and identifiable CSAM involving the Plaintiff, Grok produced new CSAM, exacerbating the extensive harm already suffered by the Plaintiff. While competitors have implemented safeguards to prevent their products from being used to create non-consensual sexual images of real individuals, xAI has chosen a contrary approach. More alarmingly, Grok not only generated CSAM but also integrated it directly within the social media platform (X), effectively inventing a product that both produces and instantly disseminates this content publicly—unlike other platforms where content generation and distribution are separate processes.”
This allegation indicates that Grok not only has the capability to generate CSAM content but also that it may have been specifically trained on illegal materials, which could have serious ramifications for the project.
It is intriguing that X is now attempting to limit users from engaging in future legal actions of this nature against the company.
David Bridges
Maya Kensington
