Grok has yanked its image-generation toy out of the hands of most X users after the UK government openly weighed a ban over the AI feature that "undressed" people on command.

In replies posted to users on X, seen by The Register , the Grok account confirmed that "image generation and editing are currently limited to paying subscribers," a change from the previous setup in which anyone could summon the system by tagging it in a post and asking for a picture.

That access helped fuel a grim trend: users uploading photos of clothed people – sometimes underage – and [1]instructing the bot to remove their clothes or pose them in sexualized ways . Grok complied.

[2]

The rollback comes as governments openly float the idea of banning or boycotting X altogether if it fails to rein in the abuse enabled by its AI tools. In the UK, screenshots of Grok-generated images quickly drew the attention of ministers and regulators, who began questioning whether X is complying with the [3]Online Safety Act .

[4]

[5]

Safeguarding minister Jess Phillips did not mince words, calling the use of Grok to create degrading, non-consensual intimate images "an absolute disgrace," warning that lives can be "devastated" by tools used to harass and abuse women and girls, according to [6]The Times . The government has already committed to banning so-called nudification apps and will become the first country to make it illegal to possess, create, or distribute AI tools designed to generate child sexual abuse material, with penalties of up to five years in prison, according to Phillips.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer echoed that line, branding what emerged on Grok as "completely unacceptable" and saying "all options are on the table" when asked whether the government would continue using the platform.

[7]UK Lords take aim at Ofcom's 'child-protection' upgrades to Online Safety Act

[8]Ofcom fines 4chan £20K and counting for pretending UK's Online Safety Act doesn't exist

[9]AI nudification site fined £55K for skipping age checks

[10]Millions of age checks performed as UK Online Safety Act gets rolling

"X need to get their act together and get this material down – and we will take action on this because it's simply not tolerable," the PM said, as per [11]The Telegraph .

Parliament's women and equalities committee has also signaled it is reconsidering its presence on the platform, [12]saying that a service "actively producing explicit and abusive material against women and children" is not suitable for official communications.

[13]

[14]Regulators have taken a similarly hard line . Ofcom has warned that platforms that fail to curb illegal or harmful content could face enforcement action and hefty fines under the Online Safety Act, while the Information Commissioner's Office said it is looking into whether data protection laws were breached, particularly where images of real people were altered without their consent.

"We are aware of reports raising serious concerns about content produced by Grok," an ICO spokesperson told The Register . "We have contacted X and xAI to seek clarity on the measures they have in place to comply with UK data protection law and protect individuals' rights."

X didn't respond to The Register 's questions, but [15]insists it takes action against illegal content, including child sexual abuse material, by removing posts, suspending accounts, and cooperating with law enforcement, adding that anyone prompting Grok to create illegal content would face the same consequences as uploading it themselves.

[16]

While Musk's decision to charge for image generation might thin the herd, it's unlikely to satisfy regulators already asking why the feature was allowed in the first place. ®

Get our [17]Tech Resources



[1] https://www.theregister.com/2026/01/03/elon_musk_grok_scandal_underwear_strippers_gross/

[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2aWDfxf2A38S0UGJNH_nhcwAAA0A&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0

[3] https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/04/millions_of_age_checks_performed/

[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aWDfxf2A38S0UGJNH_nhcwAAA0A&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aWDfxf2A38S0UGJNH_nhcwAAA0A&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[6] https://archive.ph/ZjeST

[7] https://www.theregister.com/2025/09/15/uk_lords_take_aim_at/

[8] https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/13/4chan_ofcom_fine/

[9] https://www.theregister.com/2025/11/21/ofcom_osa_fine_undress/

[10] https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/04/millions_of_age_checks_performed/

[11] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/01/08/musks-x-could-be-banned-in-britain-over-ai-chatbot-row/

[12] https://bsky.app/profile/sarahowen.org.uk/post/3mbtukc6pbs2v?

[13] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aWDfxf2A38S0UGJNH_nhcwAAA0A&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[14] https://www.theregister.com/2026/01/08/uk_regulators_swarm_x_after/

[15] https://x.com/Safety/status/2007648212421587223

[16] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aWDfxf2A38S0UGJNH_nhcwAAA0A&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[17] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/