San Francisco Pushes Apple and Google to Remove “Nudify” Apps From App Stores
San Francisco officials have ordered Apple and Google to remove dozens of so-called “nudify” apps from their app stores, escalating pressure on major tech platforms over the spread of AI-generated nonconsensual sexual images.
These apps use artificial intelligence to digitally alter photos and make people appear unclothed without their permission. City officials say the tools can be used to create nonconsensual intimate deepfakes, a growing form of digital abuse that has increasingly targeted women, girls, public figures, and private individuals whose photos are available online.
California law makes it illegal to knowingly facilitate or recklessly assist in the creation of nonconsensual deepfake pornography. A newer state law passed in 2025 also allows victims to bring civil claims against third parties that help enable the creation or distribution of this material.
San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu said Apple and Google have a responsibility to act more aggressively against apps that exploit people through AI-generated sexual content. According to the city, both companies have continued to host and profit from some of these apps despite repeated warnings.
The city’s letters to Apple and Google claim the companies have been aware for months that apps on their platforms were offering tools to generate nonconsensual intimate images in exchange for payment. Officials also allege that the companies processed transactions connected to these apps, potentially earning fees from purchases made through their app stores.
Reports from the Tech Transparency Project earlier this year identified multiple apps available through major app marketplaces that allegedly sold AI-generated nonconsensual intimate image services. The organization warned both companies in January and April that dozens of such apps were still accessible to users.
The reports also accused the platforms of helping users discover these apps through search results, recommendations, or app store visibility. Critics argue that this makes app store operators more than passive hosts, especially when payment systems and platform policies are involved.
Chiu has suggested that Apple and Google may have earned millions of dollars in fees from apps offering these services. The city is now demanding that both companies respond within 28 days and take stronger action to remove apps that violate California law.
The rise of nudify apps has fueled broader concerns about artificial intelligence, online safety, privacy, and digital consent. While deepfake pornography has often been associated with celebrities, these tools make it possible for almost anyone to become a target. A single social media photo, school picture, or professional headshot can be misused to create harmful fake sexual images.
Advocates for victims say the damage can be devastating, even when the images are fake. Targets of nonconsensual deepfake pornography may face harassment, reputational harm, emotional distress, and difficulty removing the content once it spreads online.
The San Francisco action highlights growing legal and political pressure on technology companies to police AI-powered abuse more effectively. As generative AI tools become easier to access, regulators are increasingly asking whether app stores, payment processors, and online platforms should be held accountable when they enable or profit from harmful products.
For Apple and Google, the issue could become a major test of app store moderation and platform responsibility. Both companies have policies against harmful sexual content and abusive behavior, but city officials argue that policy statements are not enough if prohibited apps remain available for download.
The demand from San Francisco adds to a widening debate over how governments should regulate AI tools that can be used for exploitation. Lawmakers, safety groups, and privacy advocates are calling for faster removals, stricter app review processes, stronger age protections, and clearer accountability for companies that distribute or monetize abusive AI software.
As the legal landscape evolves, platforms that host AI image-generation tools may face increasing scrutiny over whether they are doing enough to prevent nonconsensual deepfake abuse before it happens, rather than responding only after victims are harmed.
