The CSAM aspects aren't necessarily as affected by 230: to the extent that you're talking about it being criminal, 230 doesn't apply at all there. For civil li

The CSAM aspects aren't necessarily as affected by 230: to the extent that you're talking about it being criminal, 230 doesn't apply at all there. For civil liability, 230 really shouldn't apply; as you say, 230's shield is about avoiding vicarious liability for things other people post. This principle stretches further than you might expect in some ways but here Grok just is X (or xAI). Nothing's set in stone much at all with how the law treats LLMs but an attempt to say that Grok is an independent entity sufficient to trigger 230 but incapable of being sued itself, I don't see that flying. On the other hand the big AI companies wield massive economic and political power, so I wouldn't be surprised to see them push for and get explicit liability carveouts that they claim are necessary for America to maintain its lead in innovation etc. etc., whether those come through legislation or court decisions.