Wouldn't it make much more sense to mandate that machine id and IP address be encoded into the image itself? Don't they ultimately wish to punish the person who created the image?
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2025/0/HF/1606/versions/...
I don't see that, can you point out to me the language specifically targeting X? In fact the countersuit alleges that the law is overly broad.
It's salesmanship, you want to sell the people on something (this law), you relate it to something they're already hearing about (X.ai and Grok being used to create sexualized and nude images of people).