Editorial illustration for Apple warned Grok and X over sexual deepfakes, threatened App Store removal
Apple Warns Grok, X Over Dangerous AI Deepfake Risks
Apple warned Grok and X over sexual deepfakes, threatened App Store removal
Apple nearly pulled the plug on Grok. Sexual deepfakes, undressing real women, some of them minors, flooded the chatbot. The violation was flagrant.
Apple, however, didn’t go public. Instead, it sent a quiet ultimatum: fix the problem or lose your place on the App Store. X got a similar warning.
Both stayed live through the entire, drawn-out negotiation. While Apple privately demanded a moderation plan, Grok and X kept generating revenue for the store’s parent company. Google, too, remained silent.
Only after multiple rounds of back-and-forth did Apple deem Grok “substantially improved.” The threat of removal was real. The app never actually disappeared. That gap, between what Apple threatened and what it allowed, is the story.
Apple quietly asked developers to fix the problem or face removal from the App Store. In a letter obtained by NBC News, Apple told US senators it "contacted the teams behind both X and Grok after it received complaints and saw news coverage of the scandal" and demanded that the developers "create a plan to improve content moderation." At the time, xAI's chatbot Grok was freely accessible on X and as a standalone app, with flimsy safeguards that allowed users to easily generate and share sexualized deepfakes and "undress" images of real people, disproportionately women and some of them apparently minors. As we reported at the time, these were flagrant and unambiguous violations of App Store guidelines it often applies with an iron fist.
Apple, which profits from having apps like X and Grok on its digital store, has not spoken publicly about the issue or its behind-the-scenes intervention. Google, through its Google Play app store, profits similarly and has also not commented publicly on the matter. Apple said it reviewed proposed changes to the X and Grok apps.
While the company concluded X had "substantially resolved its violations," Grok "remained out of compliance." Apple said it warned the developer that "additional changes to remedy the violation would be required, or the app could be removed from the App Store." Only after further back and forth did Apple determine Grok had "substantially improved" and approved its submission. Throughout this covert back-and-forth, Grok and X appear to have remained live on the App Store, a drawn out process that may help explain the confusing, haphazard rollout of moderation changes announced in real time. This included limiting Grok on X to paying subscribers and attempting to stop Grok from undressing women.
Apple’s threat to remove Grok and X from the App Store was real. It was also quiet, private, and conditional. The company wielded its power behind closed doors, extracting promises and demanding fixes.
And when the fixes came, partial, late, and only after public scandal, Apple declared compliance and moved on. The apps stayed live. The profit stream stayed intact.
This is the paradox of the App Store’s moderation model. Apple can crush a developer overnight if it wants to. But when the developer is big, when the app is sticky, when the revenue is shared, the iron fist becomes a velvet glove.
The process drags. The violations are “substantially resolved.” The victims, disproportionately women and minors, are left to wonder what “substantially” really means. Grok’s deepfakes almost got it banned.
Almost. That word does a lot of work. It saves reputations.
It preserves revenue. It lets everyone involved claim they acted, without ever having to answer for the damage done in the meantime. Apple didn’t speak publicly.
Google didn’t either. The systems that profit from these harms stayed silent, and the apps stayed up. The real lesson here isn’t about content moderation.
It’s about accountability when no one is watching the watcher.
Related Reading
Policy & Regulation Grammarly faces class-action suit over AI ‘Expert Review’ feature
Policy & Regulation Claude Mythos highlights EU AI safety gaps, says researcher Caroli
Policy & Regulation After ditching AI fitness apps and a Fitbit, I return to Peloton classes
Related Topic Anthropic sues Trump as xAI restarts AI coder push, Iran releases AI fakes
Open Source
Related Topic Musk merges xAI with SpaceX, forming USD 1.25 trillion private giant
Business & Startups
From Archives Sam Altman proposes new AI 'social contract' in You.com guide
From Archives Anthropic asks OpenClaw users to pay as Netflix rolls out first public video AI
From Archives OpenAI launches USD 100 ChatGPT Pro tier with 5× Codex limits, adjusts Plus usage
LLMs & Generative AI
From Archives OpenAI cuts Pro plan to USD 100, targeting heavy Codex users and adjusts Plus usage
Business & Startups
Common Questions Answered
What action did Apple take against Grok and X regarding sexual deepfakes?
Apple contacted the developers of Grok and X, warning them about non-consensual sexual deepfakes generated on their platforms. The tech giant demanded that both companies create a plan to improve content moderation or face potential removal from the App Store.
How did Apple become aware of the sexual deepfake issues on Grok and X?
Apple learned about the sexual deepfake problems through user complaints and media coverage highlighting the scandal. The company's compliance team then reached out to the developers, obtaining a letter that was subsequently shared with US senators.
What were the potential consequences for Grok and X if they did not address the deepfake content?
If Grok and X failed to improve their content moderation, Apple threatened to remove their apps from the App Store. This action would effectively block the apps from distribution to iOS users, representing a significant potential penalty for the platforms.
