Doe v. X Corp.
Issue
Whether the "produced by force, fraud, misrepresentation, or coercion" exception to 15 U.S.C. § 6851(b)(4)(A)'s commercial-pornography exclusion encompasses a third party's unauthorized copying and reposting of consensually created commercial pornographic content—thereby imposing liability on X Corp. and xAI Corp. for hosting and using that content—and whether § 230(c)(1) independently bars such claims.
What Happened
Plaintiff, a creator of commercial pornographic content on OnlyFans and studio platforms, alleged that a third party fraudulently obtained his images by violating terms of service and uploaded them to X, which then shared them with xAI for AI model training; Plaintiff sued both entities under the federal NCII statute, 15 U.S.C. § 6851, seeking $150,000 in statutory damages. The court applied the Twombly/Iqbal plausibility standard on Defendants' Rule 12(b)(6) motion and engaged in plain-meaning statutory interpretation, rejecting Plaintiff's argument that § 6851 incorporated § 2257's broader definition of "produces" and holding that "produced" in § 6851(b)(4)(A) means only initial creation, not subsequent copying or uploading. The court further held that § 230(c)(1) independently immunized X and xAI because § 6851 is a privacy-based statute, not an intellectual property law, placing it outside § 230(e)(2)'s narrow IP exception. The court dismissed with prejudice and denied leave to amend as futile.
Why It Matters
This decision establishes that platforms sharing user-uploaded content with AI training systems do not face liability under the federal NCII statute for third-party-posted commercial pornography, and it reinforces a narrow reading of § 230's intellectual property exception that preserves broad platform immunity for privacy-based tort claims—potentially shielding AI developers like xAI from statutory damages when they receive content from platform partners rather than directly from tortious actors.
Related Filings
Other proceedings in the same litigation tracked by this monitor.
How accurate was this summary?