Former social-media employee in England says her ex-employer's ad uses an AI-altered still of her, eye colour changed and tattoos removed (first-person)
In a public post to r/LegalAdviceUK created on 7 October 2026, a person who says she worked in social media for a brand in England, creating content for its organic and paid media, writes that about four months after leaving she came across a social media ad using an image of her that had been made with AI. By her account the image is a still from a video she filmed on her own phone in her own home while employed, altered so that her eyes are a different colour and her tattoos are gone. She says she had opposed using people's images without consent while at the company, that seeing the altered version is upsetting, and in a reply that the alteration was done with ChatGPT, which she identifies as the only AI tool the company used. The employer is not named and did not respond in the thread. The account is the poster's alone and uncorroborated.
- AI system
- ChatGPT (suspected)
- Occurred
- Event date unknown
- Reported
- 7 October 2026
- Event location
- United Kingdom
- What the AI did
- Depicted or impersonated the person
- Reported harm
- Psychological Distress
- Whose AI use
- Someone else’s AI use
- Setting
- Work · Privacy
- Evidence
- AI involvement suspected · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source
- 5 claims: 5 reported. 5 open questions
- People reported harmed
- 1 person
AI system as recorded: An AI image tool that, by the poster's account, her former employer used to alter a still from her video for a social media ad; in a reply she identifies it as ChatGPT ("the only ai they used plus I can tell")
What Happened
The ad. The poster writes: "It’s been 4 months since I worked there and recently I came across a social media ad that uses an image of me and it’s been made with AI. The original image is a still taken from a video I made while working there. The video was taken on my own phone and in my house. The still is the same image however my eyes are a different colour and tattoos are gone." In a later reply she says she saw the ad "while doom scrolling TikTok".
The role. She describes her former role at the brand as social media work in which she "regularly created content to feature in organic and paid media", much of it filmed on her own phone at home. She says she expected content she made to be reused in ads after she left, and that other ads reusing her unaltered content have appeared, "but they haven’t been altered".
The tool. Asked by a commenter to check the company's AI policy, the poster replies: "It was used with ChatGPT, I know that’s the only ai they used plus I can tell." She adds that she had previously insisted at the company that people's images not be used to create new content without their consent.
Effect. The poster says: "I feel incredibly uncomfortable that my image was put through AI for these purposes", and in replies that it is "pretty upsetting to see a version of yourself on the internet" and "disturbing to see a fake version of you".
Replies. Commenters say copyright in content made in the course of employment normally rests with the employer, discuss whether processing her image for a new purpose raises a data-protection question, and suggest a solicitor or a cease-and-desist letter. The poster says she will seek legal advice and ask the employer to stop. The employer is not named and no one from it responds.
Reported harm
The poster says an AI-altered version of her image, with changed eye colour and removed tattoos, was used in her former employer's social media ad without her consent, which she describes as upsetting and disturbing (first-person account, uncorroborated).
Outcome
OngoingAt the time of the thread the poster was asking whether the use was lawful and whether to raise it through ACAS or write to the former employer; commenters suggested a solicitor and a cease-and-desist letter. No employer response, takedown or decision is reported. The poster says she is separately in ACAS early conciliation over her dismissal.
What remains unknown
- The employer and brand, and the platforms on which the ad ran.
- The tool actually used; ChatGPT is the poster's inference.
- When the ad was created and first shown; the poster says only that she came across it recently, about four months after leaving.
- Whether the employer responded to any request to stop using the altered image.
- The contractual position on content the poster made during her employment.
What the evidence supports
AI involvement: suspected. The poster says a still from her own video was put through AI and used in her former employer's social media ad with her eye colour changed and her tattoos removed, and in a reply identifies the tool as ChatGPT because it was the only AI tool the company used and she can tell from the image. The AI system's output, an altered depiction of the poster, is the artifact in the ad, and the poster connects seeing that altered version of herself to her discomfort and distress. The identification of AI and of ChatGPT rests on the poster's inference from the altered image and her knowledge of the company's tools; no employer statement or ad metadata was retrieved, so the status is suspected.
5 claims: 5 reported. What the statuses mean
Reported The poster says she worked in social media for a brand, regularly creating content for its organic and paid media, much of it filmed on her own phone at home.
Causal attribution. Poster's account.
- reddit.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
'My former role at a brand was in social media and I regularly created content to feature in organic and paid media. Majority of the content was taken on my phone in my own home'
Reported The poster says that about four months after leaving she came across a social media ad using an image of her made with AI: a still from a video she filmed while employed, altered so that her eyes are a different colour and her tattoos are gone.
Causal attribution. Poster's account; the AI alteration is her inference from the changed image. No employer statement was retrieved.
- reddit.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
'It’s been 4 months since I worked there and recently I came across a social media ad that uses an image of me and it’s been made with AI. The original image is a still taken from a video I made while working there'; 'The still is the same image however my eyes are a different colour and tattoos are gone'
Reported In a reply the poster says the alteration was done with ChatGPT, which she identifies as the only AI tool the company used.
Causal attribution. Poster's inference; the tool is not otherwise established.
- reddit.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
'It was used with ChatGPT, I know that’s the only ai they used plus I can tell'
Reported The poster says she finds the use of her altered image upsetting and disturbing, and that she had opposed using people's images without consent while at the company.
Causal attribution. Poster's account of her own reaction.
- reddit.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
'I feel incredibly uncomfortable that my image was put through AI for these purposes'; 'It’s pretty upsetting to see a version of yourself on the internet'; 'it was in general something I opposed to openly without getting people’s consent'
Reported The poster says she expected content she made to be reused in ads after she left, and that other reused ads have not been altered.
Causal attribution. Poster's account; distinguishes the altered ad from ordinary reuse.
- reddit.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
'I have seen other ads with me being reused since I left which I expected for a while, but they haven’t been altered'
Sources
1 source inspected. Sources that repeat one account do not corroborate each other.
- r/LegalAdviceUK, 7 October 2026: "Former job made AI ad with my image uk"(opens in new tab)
s1 · reddit.com · Forum post · English · Inspected · 7 October 2026 · Primary
How the sources were read, and where the events happened
Read in English on 2026-10-08: full self-text and the 36 comments retrieved through the arctic_shift archive API by post ID, 13 of them replies by the poster. The poster handle is not recorded. Applies to s1.
Event countries: United Kingdom. Affected-person countries: United Kingdom. Court countries: Unknown.
The poster states "This is in England", which places her former employment and the ad she saw in the UK. No court proceedings; the ACAS conciliation she mentions concerns her dismissal and is not a court.
Reviewed for publication 2026-10-08: Published under the public-forum rule as a concrete first-person account of an AI-altered likeness used in a former employer's advertisement without the person's consent, with the alteration and the ChatGPT identification attributed to the poster as her inference. Described with attribution and without corroboration; the employer is not named, the poster's handle is not recorded, and details of her dismissal are omitted.
People described
The poster, a former social-media employee of a brand in England whose altered likeness she says appears in the ex-employer's ad
People reported harmed in this case
1 person
0 AI participants · 1 other person harmed
One person counted: the poster, whose altered likeness she says appears in the ad. The alteration was the former employer's use, so the poster is counted under others' use rather than as a direct user.
Counted once within this case. The same person may appear in other cases. This count does not establish AI causation.
Cite this case
Compiled per our published methodology: verification statuses, sourcing standards, and corrections process.
APA
NOPE. (2026). Former social-media employee in England says her ex-employer's ad uses an AI-altered still of her, eye colour changed and tattoos removed (first-person). AI incidents. https://nope.net/incidents/2026-england-former-social-media-employee-finds-ai-altered-image-of-herself-in-ex-employer-ad-first-person
BibTeX
@misc{2026_england_former_social_media_employee_finds_ai_altered_image_of_herself_in_ex_employer_ad_first_person,
title = {Former social-media employee in England says her ex-employer's ad uses an AI-altered still of her, eye colour changed and tattoos removed (first-person)},
author = {NOPE},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {AI incidents},
url = {https://nope.net/incidents/2026-england-former-social-media-employee-finds-ai-altered-image-of-herself-in-ex-employer-ad-first-person}
} Related cases
Saginaw, Michigan: a credit union CEO used ChatGPT to put herself and family members in 'Lake America' sweatshirts in a photo taken before a trip to Halifax; after her sister reposted it publicly without its AI label she says she received death threats and the family came home early, and on 23 September 2026 the credit union said she was no longer employed
The chief executive of Family First Credit Union in Saginaw, Michigan, told WJRT (ABC12) that before boarding a flight to Halifax, Nova Scotia, on 11 September 2026 she and family members took a photo and put it through ChatGPT to show them wearing 'Lake America' sweatshirts, a joke about the US president's order renaming Lake Ontario. She posted it to her private Facebook page with a marker saying it contained AI content; her sister reposted it publicly without the marker while they were in Halifax, and it spread in Canada as if the family had worn the shirts. The backlash concerned the image's political message; she said she would understand the anger of anyone in Halifax who thought the family had walked in wearing those sweatshirts. She said she was getting death threats and the family returned early; by 16 September she was back in the US. She called the post poor judgment, said she would not use AI again and that AI 'can make people think something's real that's not'. On 23 September the credit union said she was no longer an employee, effective immediately; it has not said whether she resigned or was dismissed, or why.
Omaha, Nebraska: a man who, according to prosecutors, used ChatGPT to plan, including questions on police response times, repairing a handgun and getting ammunition as a felon, robbed an i3Bank at gunpoint and threatened to kill the tellers; sentenced to 121 months
On 10 February 2026 a 23-year-old man walked into the i3Bank in Omaha, pointed a gun at the tellers, threatened to kill them unless they handed over cash without dye packs, and left with about $9,175. According to the prosecutor's statement relayed by WOWT and heise, a consented search of his phone showed he had used ChatGPT to plan the robbery, asking about law enforcement response times, how to strip and repair a Llama Mini-Max .45 handgun, and how to obtain ammunition as a felon; his Google Maps history showed directions to the bank. He was sentenced in federal court on 13 August 2026 to 10 years and one month in prison. No source quotes what ChatGPT answered.
UK: a trades-college staff member says a student reported that a video showing her undressing, which appeared to be a manipulated version of an apparently real video of her talking with a student, was circulating among classmates; she stepped away from the class for weeks and says the atmosphere had chilled on her return
WIRED (Caroline Haskins, 24 August 2026) reports the account of a staff member at a UK college that trains 16-to-19-year-olds in trades such as construction, whose job combines administration with a counselling role; WIRED identifies her by first name only, which is not repeated here. She says administrators told her this winter that a student had reported two videos circulating among classmates: one apparently real, showing her talking with a student, and one that appeared to be a manipulated version showing her taking her clothes off and dancing in underwear or a bikini. The student she suspected denied making it when questioned and soon dropped out. The college let her step away from the class for a few weeks and educated students about deepfakes; she says the atmosphere had chilled when she returned and that the episode has made her more cautious. The college did not respond to WIRED.
Thanh Hóa, Vietnam: police say nearly 20 people were threatened with fabricated sexual images of themselves unless they paid; one demand was 1.5 billion dong
Thanh Hóa provincial police said on 3 October 2026 that their cybersecurity and high-tech crime division had, since the start of October, received reports from nearly 20 people threatened with extortion using sexual images and videos spliced from their own photos, which senders threatened to publish unless money was transferred. One victim was asked for as much as 1.5 billion dong, and officials, including commune-level leaders, were among the targets. The police release says the material was made with technology; Báo Thanh Hóa, reporting information compiled from the same police division, says the senders used AI and deepfake technology to put victims' faces onto sexual images. No payment, arrest or named victim is reported.
If you or someone you know is struggling, free and confidential support is available. Find a helpline near you at Signpost.