Centre seeks legal opinion on action over Grok misuse
India's MeitY is seeking legal action against X for objectionable AI-generated content by Grok, challenging the liability of generative AI under local law.
The electronics and information technology ministry (MeitY) is seeking legal opinion on potential action against X over objectionable content generated by its AI tool Grok. This signals a possible escalation that could test uncharted territory in Indian law: whether generative AI systems should be held liable as content creators rather than neutral platform tools.
The move comes as the ministry has rejected X’s response to its January 2 letter demanding action on sexually explicit deepfakes created by Grok, with officials describing the company’s submission as inadequate.
The case presents a regulatory challenge that extends beyond X. Under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, platforms enjoy “safe harbour” immunity from liability for content posted by users, provided they comply with due diligence requirements. But generative AI systems like Grok occupy an ambiguous space—they are neither passive platforms transmitting user content nor traditional users creating content independently. MeitY’s position that Grok should be classified as a content creator, if upheld, could establish a precedent for how India regulates AI-generated material across platforms.
“The opposite side is very big and very powerful, which is why our stand has to be unambiguous. The law of the land must prevail,” a senior IT ministry official said, adding that the same approach would apply to other platforms if their AI bots generate unlawful content. “However, in Grok’s case, the impact is accelerated because it operates on a platform like X.”
Officials said the ministry has made clear that Grok cannot be treated as a neutral platform tool. “The mindset has now changed. Earlier, they were operating from a higher position, but we have brought the issue down to the level of the law,” the official said. “Grok cannot be treated as a platform. It is a content creator, an artificial content creator. Just as I am a human content creator, Grok is an artificial one.”
MeitY has told X it is not satisfied with the company’s January 7 response to the government’s letter. According to people familiar with internal discussions, the government has conveyed that X’s submission did not address core concerns. One official described the reply as the company “essentially reproducing its own user policy across five pages and sending them to the ministry”.
The issue of Grok’s image manipulation has snowballed into a global controversy, with multiple regulators in Europe and elsewhere opening investigations. X announced on Friday it was limiting the image-generating capabilities to only paid users as the backlash ballooned.
The Indian government has asked X to “categorically first explain what actions it has taken in response to the content generated by Grok”, including steps taken against offending content and users.
MeitY’s January 2 letter flagged what it called serious failures in preventing obscene and sexually explicit content generated using Grok, warning that continued non-compliance could lead to the loss of legal protection under Indian law.
“It has especially been observed that the service namely ‘Grok AI’... is being misused by users to create fake accounts to host, generate, publish or share obscene images or videos of women in a derogatory or vulgar manner in order to indecently denigrate them,” the letter, addressed to X’s chief compliance officer for India, said.
The ministry said the abuse was not limited to fake accounts and also involved legitimate photos and videos uploaded by women that were later manipulated through AI prompts and synthetic outputs. It directed X to submit a detailed action taken report outlining technical measures for Grok, the role of the chief compliance officer, action taken against offending users and content, and systems to meet mandatory crime-reporting requirements.
People aware of the matter said that in the days leading to the January 2 letter, MeitY had held discussions with X’s compliance teams over Grok’s responses to political and religious queries, adding that the sexually explicit and degrading content cited in the letter was not raised during those routine meetings.
The ministry warned that failure to comply could result in the loss of intermediary immunity under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act and “strict legal consequences” against the platform, its responsible officers and users. It has also asked X to carry out a comprehensive technical and governance-level review of Grok to ensure it does not generate or promote unlawful or sexualised content.
The January 2 letter followed a December 29 advisory from MeitY warning intermediaries that some social media content may violate decency and obscenity laws. At the time, a senior official said there was a “general feeling that obscene content had increased and significant social media intermediaries aren’t doing enough to control it”.
X did not respond to requests for comment.
