{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-10-23T09:02:43.297Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"california","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"","evidence":"","year":"2024","response":"lawsuit","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":2,"coverage":{"cases":2,"countries":1,"languages":1,"unknownLocation":1,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":0,"lawsuits":2,"regulatory":0,"minors":1,"coreRelations":1,"contextualRelations":1,"mixedRelations":0,"unknownRelations":0,"relationPending":0,"relationUnknown":0},"countingNote":"Distinct public cases in this selection. People counts apply within individual cases only; cross-case person overlap has not been resolved. No population incidence estimate.","affectedCountNote":"Interpret person counts with affectedCountStatus and the reported effects. Unquantified zeros are placeholders, not a measured zero.","source":"AI incidents","publisher":"NOPE","url":"https://nope.net/incidents","license":"CC BY 4.0"},"incidents":[{"id":"2024-us-otter-notetaker-recorded-non-users-meetings-privacy-suit","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'participated in a Zoom meeting in California on February'; '24, 2025, where the Otter Notetaker was used by a meeting participant to transcribe the'; 'participated in a Zoom meeting in California in March 2025'; 'used Zoom to communicate with a medical professional, and'; 'Illinois on January 10, 2025 and May 19, 2025 where the Otter Notetaker was used to'; 'participated in a Zoom meeting in Washington state in March'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Plaintiffs are seven individuals from California, Illinois, and Washington state who'; 'participated in virtual meetings where the Otter Notetaker was allegedly used without their'; 'consent to record, transcribe, and store the contents of their communications.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'Otter lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the'; 'allegations concerning the named Plaintiff’s personal knowledge, experiences, expectations, or'","relation":"contradicts","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"'who alleges his privacy was \"severely invaded\" upon realizing Otter was secretly recording a confidential conversation.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"}],"assertion":"Seven people who were not Otter account holders allege that, on Zoom or Microsoft Teams calls (six give dates between March 2024 and May 2025), another participant used Otter Notetaker and Otter recorded, transcribed and stored their conversations without their consent; the calls include one with a medical professional and meetings with a financial professional.","causal_attribution":"The plaintiffs attribute the recording to Otter's product design, which they say lets the notetaker record without every participant's consent; Otter denies the allegations."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'other personal information for its own commercial use, including to train its automatic speech'; 'The Illinois Plaintiffs allege that, during their virtual meetings, Otter'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'Otter claims that before the audio of meetings is fed into its machine learning systems to help improve an AI speech recognition feature, it is \"de-identified,\"'","relation":"context","source_id":"s5"}],"assertion":"The plaintiffs allege that Otter keeps their conversational data on its servers and uses it to train its speech-recognition and machine-learning models, and that it captured the Illinois plaintiffs' voiceprints; Otter's policy, as reported by NPR, says it trains on transcripts with users' permission and de-identifies audio.","causal_attribution":"Alleged by the plaintiffs; Otter denies the allegations."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'felt frustrated, embarrassed, and stressed to learn that his'; 'conversation was recorded without his consent, and his information, voice, and'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"One California plaintiff alleges that he felt frustrated, embarrassed and stressed to learn that his conversation had been recorded without his consent.","causal_attribution":"Alleged by the plaintiffs as a consequence of Otter's recording."},{"id":"c4","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Accordingly, the motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ claims for lack of standing is denied.'; 'Accordingly, the motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ ECPA claim is denied.'; 'Accordingly, the motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ BIPA claims for lack of standing is denied.'; 'The motion to dismiss is GRANTED with leave to amend as to Count 2'; 'The motion is DENIED in all other respects.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"On 13 August 2026 the court denied Otter's motion to dismiss for lack of standing, holding that the alleged interception and retention of private conversations was a concrete injury, let the federal wiretap, California eavesdropping and Illinois biometric claims proceed, and dismissed some other claims.","causal_attribution":"Procedural ruling on the pleadings; no finding that Otter recorded anyone unlawfully."}],"effects":[{"label":"the plaintiffs say Otter's notetaker recorded, transcribed and stored their conversations on calls they joined, without their consent, including a medical call and calls with a financial professional","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"},{"label":"the plaintiffs say their conversations stay on Otter's servers for training its models and that it captured voiceprints of the Illinois plaintiffs","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"},{"label":"one plaintiff says he felt frustrated, embarrassed and stressed to learn he had been recorded","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.454675/gov.uscourts.cand.454675.35.0.pdf","kind":"court_filing","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Consolidated Class Action Complaint, ECF 35, filed 5 December 2025; RECAP PDF (68 pages) read on 2026-09-29 (HTTP 200), plaintiffs' experience sections read in full. Plaintiffs' allegations, not findings.","independence_group":"plaintiffs-account"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.454675/gov.uscourts.cand.454675.68.0.pdf","kind":"court_filing","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Order Granting Motion to Dismiss in Part, ECF 68, 13 August 2026 (Judge Eumi K. Lee); RECAP PDF read in full on 2026-09-29. Rules on the pleadings and accepts the allegations as true for that purpose; it makes no finding of fact.","independence_group":"ndcal-court-record"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.454675/gov.uscourts.cand.454675.80.0.pdf","kind":"court_filing","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Otter.ai's Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs' Consolidated Class Action Complaint, ECF 80, 17 September 2026; RECAP PDF read on 2026-09-29, plaintiff-experience paragraphs and responses read.","independence_group":"otter-answer"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.454675/gov.uscourts.cand.454675.1.0.pdf","kind":"court_filing","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Brewer v. Otter.ai, Inc., original Class Action Complaint, ECF 1, filed 15 August 2025; RECAP PDF read on 2026-09-29.","independence_group":"plaintiffs-account"},{"id":"s5","url":"https://www.npr.org/2025/08/15/g-s1-83087/otter-ai-transcription-class-action-lawsuit","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"NPR, 15 August 2025, read live on 2026-09-29 (HTTP 200). Reports the original complaint and summarises Otter's privacy policy; says neither side responded to requests for comment.","independence_group":"plaintiffs-account"},{"id":"s6","url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.454675/gov.uscourts.cand.454675.79.0.pdf","kind":"court_filing","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Amended Case Management and Scheduling Order, ECF 79, 16 September 2026; read on 2026-09-29. Procedural facts only.","independence_group":"ndcal-court-record"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["privacy","work","health","finance"],"unknowns":["Whether Otter's product notified the plaintiffs on their calls that the notetaker was present, and what the other participants' Otter settings were.","Whether the plaintiffs' conversations were in fact used to train Otter's models, and in what form.","The exact date of one Illinois plaintiff's meetings, which the complaint places only within the limitations period."],"geography":{"basis":"The consolidated complaint places the plaintiffs' calls in California, in Chicago and elsewhere in Illinois, and in Washington state; the order describes the plaintiffs as individuals from California, Illinois and Washington state. The case is in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.","court_countries":["US"],"event_countries":["US"],"affected_person_countries":["US"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a bounded series of concrete privacy harms reported by identified people in a pending federal suit: each named plaintiff describes a call on which another participant's AI notetaker recorded and transcribed them without consent. The account rests on the plaintiffs' pleadings and the court's ruling on them; Otter denies the allegations. Plaintiff names are omitted.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-13"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"Each plaintiff alleges that another participant's Otter account joined the Otter Notetaker, an AI transcription assistant, to a Zoom or Microsoft Teams call the plaintiff was on, and that the notetaker recorded, transcribed and stored the plaintiff's conversation on Otter's servers without the plaintiff's knowledge or consent (ECF 35, the consolidated complaint; the court's 13 August 2026 order summarises the same allegation). That alleged capture of the plaintiffs' conversations by an AI service is the reported harm. The complaint also alleges that Otter used the recordings to train its speech-recognition models and took voiceprints of the Illinois plaintiffs. Otter admits it offers an AI meeting assistant called Otter Notetaker but says it lacks knowledge of the plaintiffs' calls and denies the allegations. The capture is alleged, not established, so the status is reported.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["received_personal_information"]},"name":"United States: seven people who say they had no Otter account allege its AI Notetaker recorded calls without consent; a judge let core privacy claims proceed","summary":"Seven people in California, Illinois and Washington state are suing Otter.ai in a consolidated class action in the Northern District of California. Each says another meeting participant used Otter's AI Notetaker on a Zoom or Microsoft Teams call they joined, and that Otter recorded, transcribed and stored their conversation without their consent; six of them date their calls between March 2024 and May 2025. They say they were not Otter account holders. The calls they describe include a medical consultation, meetings with a financial professional and work discussions. They allege that Otter keeps the recordings and uses them to train its speech-recognition models, that it captured voiceprints of the Illinois plaintiffs, and one of them says learning of the recording left him frustrated, embarrassed and stressed. On 13 August 2026 the court found that the alleged interception of private conversations was a concrete injury and let the federal wiretap, California eavesdropping and Illinois biometric claims proceed, while dismissing some claims. Otter's answer to the consolidated complaint, filed on 17 September 2026, says it lacks knowledge of the plaintiffs' experiences and denies the allegations.","incidentDate":"2024-03-01","incidentEndDate":"2025-05-19","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"month","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2025-08-15","aiSystem":"Otter Notetaker, Otter.ai's AI meeting assistant, joined to Zoom and Microsoft Teams calls by another participant's Otter account","aiProduct":"Otter Notetaker","aiCompany":"Otter.ai, Inc.","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["other_material_harm","psychological_distress"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The plaintiffs allege that Otter recorded, transcribed and kept their private conversations on calls they joined without their consent, including medical and financial discussions, used them to train its models and took voiceprints, and one plaintiff says learning this left him frustrated, embarrassed and stressed (plaintiffs' allegations in a pending suit; Otter denies them).","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":7,"affectedCountStatus":"documented_minimum","affectedCountEvidence":"The court order says 'Plaintiffs are seven individuals from California, Illinois, and Washington state' who participated in meetings where the Otter Notetaker was allegedly used without their consent; each describes their own call in the consolidated complaint. They were not Otter account holders (one says only that to her knowledge she did not create an account), so they are counted as other people. The proposed class members are not counted. Documented minimum 7.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"US","platformType":"assistant","outcomeType":"lawsuit_ongoing","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.454675/gov.uscourts.cand.454675.68.0.pdf","primarySourceLabel":"Order granting motion to dismiss in part, In re Otter.AI Privacy Litigation, No. 5:25-cv-06911-EKL (N.D. Cal.), 13 August 2026","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-29T09:04:08.493618+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-13T03:15:43.76525+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["otter-ai","ai-notetaker","meeting-transcription","privacy","wiretap","bipa","voiceprint","training-data","class-action","non-user"]},{"id":"2026-ad-v-character-technologies","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"Case 3:26-cv-08400-LJC Document 1 Filed 08/13/26; A.D., a minor, by and through her proposed guardian; NEGLIGENCE – GENERAL; NEGLIGENCE – FAILURE TO WARN; NEGLIGENCE – UNREASONABLE DESIGN; STRICT LIABILITY – DESIGN DEFECT; STRICT LIABILITY – FAILURE TO WARN","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"A.D. v. Character Technologies, Inc., 3:26-cv-08400, (N.D. Cal.); Date Filed: Aug. 13, 2026","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"The Character.AI lawsuit was filed on Thursday, August 13, 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"Gibbs Mura filed a lawsuit on August 13, 2026","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"}],"assertion":"A complaint by A.D., a minor, through her proposed guardian ad litem K.H., against Character Technologies, Inc., Noam Shazeer, Daniel De Freitas Adiwardana, Google LLC and Alphabet Inc. was filed on 13 August 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (No. 3:26-cv-08400), pleading five negligence and strict-liability causes of action against all defendants.","causal_attribution":"The complaint and the docket establish the filing, the parties and the causes of action; counsel's statements repeat the filing date."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"In or around 2024, when Plaintiff; was approximately twelve years old, Plaintiff created an account while she was at school.; Plaintiff’s parents were neither present when Plaintiff created her Character.AI account,; Character.AI never asked Plaintiff to verify her age.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The complaint says the girl created a Character.AI account at school in or around 2024, when she was approximately twelve, that her parents were neither present nor aware, and that Character.AI never asked her to verify her age.","causal_attribution":"Allegations in the complaint; one source."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"to foster addiction to and emotional dependency on its chatbot technology, groomed Plaintiff through; simulated sexual encounters, and encouraged Plaintiff’s self-harm, violence, and suicidality.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The complaint alleges that Character.AI fostered her addiction to and emotional dependency on its chatbot, groomed her through simulated sexual encounters, and encouraged her self-harm, violence and suicidality.","causal_attribution":"The complaint's allegation about the chatbots' conduct; it quotes no conversation and names no character, and no other source describes her conversations."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"Plaintiff has suffered profound physical, emotional, and psychological harm from the; struggle with depression, self-harm, and suicidal ideation, among other injuries.; between children and adults—and coercive power dynamics—as normal, Character.AI has left Plaintiff; vulnerable to future grooming and sexual exploitation.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The complaint says she has suffered profound physical, emotional and psychological harm and continues to struggle with depression, self-harm and suicidal ideation, and alleges that being conditioned to view sexual interactions between children and adults as normal has left her vulnerable to future grooming.","causal_attribution":"The complaint attributes these injuries to the defendants' design and operation of Character.AI; no medical record or independent account was inspected."},{"id":"c5","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines; Order on Ex Parte Application AND Order on Ex Parte Application; Administrative Motion to File Under Seal; Stipulation without Proposed Order; Order on Administrative Motion to File Under Seal; Case Assigned/Reassigned; Summons Returned Executed; Waiver of Service Executed; Date of Last Known Filing: Oct. 22, 2026","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"By 22 October 2026 the docket showed, after the complaint, a scheduling order, two ex parte applications with orders, summons issued, a sealing motion and an order on it, notices of attorney appearance, a stipulation without proposed order, a case reassignment, and summonses returned executed and waivers of service, but no answer, motion to dismiss or ruling on the merits.","causal_attribution":"Docket entry titles; their texts were not read."},{"id":"c6","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"Character.AI filed a petition for chapter 11 bankruptcy on October 12.; In a declaration filed as part of the bankruptcy, Character.AI’s newly appointed CEO explained that the goal of the bankruptcy was to reach a “consensual resolution” with personal injury claimants","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"}],"assertion":"WIRED reports that Character.AI filed a petition for chapter 11 bankruptcy on 12 October 2026, and that its newly appointed chief executive's declaration describes the goal as a consensual resolution with personal injury claimants and the states investigating the company.","causal_attribution":"WIRED's account of the bankruptcy filings, which do not mention this case; whether the bankruptcy affects this lawsuit is not reported."}],"effects":[{"label":"simulated sexual encounters with a child that the complaint describes as grooming","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"},{"label":"continuing depression, self-harm and suicidal ideation, as alleged","claim_id":"c4","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.476159/gov.uscourts.cand.476159.1.0.pdf","kind":"court_filing","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-10-23 (live PDF, HTTP 200, 2.1 MB; bodies/lr-adv-complaint.pdf/.txt via pdftotext). Caption: Case 3:26-cv-08400-LJC, Document 1, filed 08/13/26, 77 pages. The plaintiff-specific allegations are paragraphs 264 to 270; the rest of the complaint is platform-wide and quotes none of her conversations.","independence_group":"ad-complaint"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/74645761/ad-v-character-technologies-inc/","kind":"court_docket","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-10-23 (live page, HTTP 200; bodies/lr-adv-docket.html/.txt), last updated 22 Oct 2026. Entry titles only; the texts of entries after the complaint were not read (PACER purchase required).","independence_group":"cand-docket"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20260813331103/en/Character.AI-Charged-With-Teen-Mental-Health-Harm-in-Lawsuit-by-Gibbs-Mura-A-Law-Group","kind":"press_release","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Live page returned HTTP 403 on 2026-10-23; read in English from an Internet Archive web/2026id_ capture (bodies/lr-adv-bw-wb.html/.txt). Plaintiff's counsel's announcement; it describes the claims in general terms and nothing specific to this plaintiff.","independence_group":"gibbs-mura-counsel"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://www.classlawgroup.com/character-ai-lawsuits","kind":"press_release","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-10-23 (live page, HTTP 200; bodies/lr-adv-classlaw.html/.txt). Plaintiff's counsel's litigation and client-intake page; not an independent account.","independence_group":"gibbs-mura-counsel"},{"id":"s5","url":"https://www.wired.com/story/disney-asked-characterai-to-go-bankrupt-for-a-get-out-of-lawsuits-card/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-10-23 (live page, HTTP 200; bodies/lr-adv-wired.html/.txt). Reports the Character.AI chapter 11 filing from court filings; it does not mention this plaintiff's case.","independence_group":"wired-bankruptcy"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["own_use"],"contexts":["relationships","health"],"unknowns":["The content of her conversations: the public complaint quotes no transcript and names no character, and no other source describes them.","When the alleged grooming and self-harm encouragement occurred, beyond account creation in or around 2024 and filing in August 2026.","Whether she received treatment or was hospitalised; the complaint's prayer mentions hospitalisation expenses only in general terms.","Where she used the platform; the complaint gives her residence but not the school or place of use.","What the ex parte applications, the sealed filing, the 15 October notice and the 19 October stipulation concern, and whether the Character.AI bankruptcy stays the case against it.","Any response by the defendants to these allegations; none was found as of 23 October 2026."],"geography":{"basis":"Paragraph 3 of the complaint says the girl and her mother are residents of Jefferson County, Kentucky, so the affected person's country is US. Paragraph 265 says she created the account at school and no paragraph locates the school or any place where she used the platform; a residence is not used as the event location, so the event country is unknown. The complaint caption, the docket and counsel's release place the case in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, so the court country is US. Carried forward from the 2026-10-07 metadata review and re-checked against the complaint and docket on 2026-10-23.","court_countries":["US"],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":["US"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a core case (communicated_with). The complaint alleges that Character.AI chatbots engaged the plaintiff, who began using the platform at about age twelve, in simulated sexual encounters and encouraged self-harm and suicidality, and attributes her continuing depression and self-harm to them. The allegations are untested and the complaint quotes none of her conversations.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-23"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The complaint alleges that Character.AI's chatbots engaged the girl, who began using the platform at about age twelve, in simulated sexual encounters that it calls grooming and encouraged her self-harm, violence and suicidality, and it attributes her continuing depression, self-harm and suicidal ideation to that conduct and to the dependency the chatbots fostered. The public complaint quotes none of her conversations and names no character, and the defendants have not answered; the account is the plaintiff's allegation.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["communicated_with"]},"name":"Lawsuit for a girl who began using Character.AI at about 12 alleges its chatbots groomed her through simulated sexual encounters and encouraged self-harm","summary":"A complaint filed on 13 August 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California by a girl, through her mother, says she created a Character.AI account at school in or around 2024, when she was about twelve, without her parents' knowledge and without being asked to verify her age. It alleges that Character.AI fostered addiction and emotional dependency, groomed her through simulated sexual encounters and encouraged self-harm, violence and suicidality, and that she continues to struggle with depression, self-harm and suicidal ideation. The public complaint quotes none of her conversations. Character Technologies, Google, Alphabet and the two co-founders are named as defendants. By 22 October 2026 the docket showed service and appearance filings but no answer, motion to dismiss or ruling; Character.AI filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy on 12 October 2026, according to WIRED. The allegations are untested.","incidentDate":"2024-01-01","incidentKind":"ongoing_experience","incidentDatePrecision":"year","exposurePattern":"cumulative_relationship","reportedDate":"2026-08-13","aiSystem":"Character.AI companion chatbots (characters not identified in the complaint)","aiProduct":"Character.AI","aiCompany":"Character Technologies Inc.","severity":"high","verificationStatus":"verified","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["self_injury","psychological_distress","exploitation_or_abuse"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The complaint alleges that Character.AI chatbots groomed the girl through simulated sexual encounters, encouraged self-harm and suicidality, and left her with continuing depression, self-harm and suicidal ideation.","frameworkFacets":[],"pathwayDirection":"inward","causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":1,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":0,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"The complaint describes one plaintiff, the girl who used Character.AI. Her mother sues on her behalf and no separate harm to her is pleaded, so she is not counted.","victimAgeRange":"minor","jurisdiction":"US","platformType":"companion","outcomeType":"lawsuit_filed","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.476159/gov.uscourts.cand.476159.1.0.pdf","primarySourceLabel":"A.D. v. Character Technologies complaint, N.D. Cal. No. 3:26-cv-08400, filed 13 Aug 2026 (CourtListener RECAP)","firstPublishedAt":"2026-08-25T19:09:14.721121+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-23T03:02:21.21544+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["lawsuit","character-ai","google","minor","self-harm","sexual-content","us"]}]}