{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-10-23T10:13:37.114Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"chai","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"contextual","evidence":"","year":"","response":"regulatory","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":2,"coverage":{"cases":2,"countries":1,"languages":1,"unknownLocation":1,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":0,"lawsuits":0,"regulatory":2,"minors":0,"coreRelations":0,"contextualRelations":2,"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":"2019-us-rite-aid-facial-recognition-false-matches-led-staff-to-search-and-eject-shoppers-ftc-says","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'The technology generated alerts sent to Rite Aid’s employees, including by email or mobile phone application notifications (“match alerts”), indicating that individuals who had entered Rite Aid stores were matches for entries in Rite Aid’s watchlist database.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"Rite Aid used facial recognition in its stores to send employees match alerts saying that people entering were matches for its watchlist database, and employees acted on the alerts.","causal_attribution":"FTC allegation; Rite Aid neither admits nor denies."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'In numerous instances, the match alerts that led to these actions were false positives' and 'Rite Aid employees recorded thousands of false positive match alerts between December 2019 and July 2020.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The FTC alleges that in numerous instances the alerts that led employees to watch, eject, accuse, search or report customers to police were false positives, and that employees recorded thousands of false-positive alerts between December 2019 and July 2020.","causal_attribution":"FTC allegation from Rite Aid records; not adjudicated."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Rite Aid employees stopped and searched an 11-year-old girl on the basis of a false- positive facial recognition match. The girl’s mother told Rite Aid that she had missed work because her daughter was so distraught by the incident.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"Employees stopped and searched an 11-year-old girl on a false-positive match; her mother told Rite Aid she missed work because her daughter was so distraught.","causal_attribution":"FTC allegation based on a complaint to Rite Aid."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'an alert indicating that a consumer—' and 'specifically a Black woman—was a match for an enrollment image that Rite Aid employees' and 'described as depicting “a white lady with blonde hair.” In response to the alert, Rite Aid' and 'employees called the police and asked the woman to leave the store before realizing the alert was'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The system matched a Black woman to an enrollment image employees described as a white woman with blonde hair; employees called the police and asked her to leave before realising the alert was false.","causal_attribution":"FTC allegation drawn from Rite Aid's internal investigation."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Consumers complained to Rite Aid that they had experienced humiliation and feelings of stigmatization as a result of being confronted' and '[E]very black man is not [a] thief nor should they be made to feel like one' and 'I feel different from this experience when I walk into a store now it’s weird.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"Customers complained of humiliation and stigmatisation from false-positive stops; one wrote of feeling different entering stores afterwards and of being made to feel like a thief.","causal_attribution":"Consumer complaints as quoted by the FTC."},{"id":"c6","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'are prohibited for five (5) years from the effective date of this Order from deploying or using, or assisting in the deployment or use of, any Facial Recognition or Analysis System' and 'Defendants neither admit nor deny any of the allegations in the Complaint'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Rite Aid agreed to a proposed stipulated order prohibiting it for five years from using facial recognition or analysis systems in retail stores, while neither admitting nor denying the complaint's allegations.","causal_attribution":"Terms of the filed proposed order; its entry by the court was not inspected."}],"effects":[{"label":"girl stopped and searched on a false facial-recognition match","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"},{"label":"police called and customer asked to leave on a false match","claim_id":"c4","direction":"negative"},{"label":"humiliation and stigmatisation from false-positive stops","claim_id":"c5","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/2023190_riteaid_complaint_filed.pdf","kind":"court_filing","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-22 from the Internet Archive capture (ftc.gov direct returned 404); no translation needed. FTC complaint, E.D. Pa. 2:23-cv-05023, Document 1, filed 19 Dec 2023; the text of page 1 was not extractable.","independence_group":"ftc-v-rite-aid-2023-filings"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/2023190_riteaid_stipulated_order_filed.pdf","kind":"court_filing","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-22 from the Internet Archive capture (ftc.gov direct returned 404); no translation needed. Proposed stipulated order and attached decision and order, Document 2-2, filed 19 Dec 2023.","independence_group":"ftc-v-rite-aid-2023-filings"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["everyday_life","privacy"],"unknowns":["When and where the girl was searched and the police were called on the woman.","Which vendors supplied the technology (the complaint does not name them in the text read).","Whether and when the court entered the proposed order.","How many customers were stopped, searched or ejected on false matches."],"geography":{"basis":"The complaint places Rite Aid's facial recognition use in its US stores (New York City, Los Angeles and other US cities); it was filed in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The described customers' countries are not stated.","court_countries":["US"],"event_countries":["US"],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a contextual case (made_claim_about, informed_decision_about): the FTC alleges Rite Aid's facial recognition wrongly matched customers to a watchlist and staff acted on the false alerts by searching an 11-year-old girl and calling police on a woman; Rite Aid agreed to a five-year ban without admitting the allegations.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-22"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The FTC complaint says Rite Aid's facial recognition system compared customers' faces with a watchlist and sent employees match alerts, that the alerts were in numerous instances false positives (the system wrongly identified a person as someone in the database), and that employees acted on those false alerts by searching an 11-year-old girl, calling police on a Black woman and asking customers to leave. The system's own wrong matches are the alleged error; Rite Aid neither admits nor denies.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["made_claim_about","informed_decision_about"]},"name":"US: FTC says Rite Aid's facial recognition falsely matched shoppers to a watchlist, leading staff to search an 11-year-old girl and call police on a woman","summary":"In a complaint filed in federal court in Pennsylvania on 19 December 2023, the US Federal Trade Commission alleged that the pharmacy chain Rite Aid used facial recognition in its stores to match customers against a database of people it suspected of shoplifting or other wrongdoing, and that staff acted on the match alerts by following, searching, ejecting and publicly accusing customers and by calling the police. The FTC says many alerts were false positives: employees recorded thousands of false-positive alerts between December 2019 and July 2020, staff stopped and searched an 11-year-old girl on a false match, and employees called the police on a Black woman matched to an image of a white woman with blonde hair. Rite Aid agreed to a proposed order barring it from using facial recognition in retail stores for five years, without admitting or denying the allegations.","incidentDate":"2019-12-01","incidentEndDate":"2020-07-01","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"month","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2023-12-19","aiSystem":"Facial recognition technology from two vendors (not named in the complaint) that Rite Aid deployed in its stores to compare customers' faces with a watchlist database and send match alerts to employees","aiProduct":"Unidentified facial recognition system","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["psychological_distress","reputational_harm","other_material_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The FTC alleges that false facial-recognition matches led Rite Aid staff to search, eject, publicly accuse and call police on customers, including an 11-year-old girl who was searched and a Black woman on whom police were called; customers described humiliation and stigmatisation.","frameworkFacets":[],"pathwayDirection":"inward","causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":3,"affectedCountStatus":"partial","affectedCountEvidence":"Three people described individually in the complaint: the 11-year-old girl searched on a false match, the Black woman on whom police were called, and the customer who wrote about being treated as a thief. The complaint's thousands of recorded false-positive alerts are alerts, not counted people, so others remain unquantified.","victimAgeRange":"unknown","jurisdiction":"US","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"regulatory_action","outcomeStatus":"unknown","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/2023190_riteaid_complaint_filed.pdf","primarySourceLabel":"FTC v. Rite Aid Corp., E.D. Pa. 2:23-cv-05023, complaint filed 19 Dec 2023","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-22T03:13:38.451275+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-22T03:13:38.451275+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["facial_recognition","retail","alleged_false_match","ftc"]},{"id":"2026-caine-prize-winning-story-pangram-ai-detector-accusation-prize-review","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'The central evidence of Vara’s article, “Yet Another Literary Prizewinner Seems to Be AI,” is a scan by Pangram, an AI-detection tool, which flags almost the entire story as AI-generated, with the epigraph as a notable exception.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'a recent article in The Atlantic said AI-detection software Pangram had shown his work about a boy whose family falls on hard times was entirely AI generated'; 'had been published on Sunday'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The Atlantic published an article on Sunday 11 October 2026 whose central evidence was a scan by the Pangram AI-text detection tool flagging almost all of the 2026 Caine Prize-winning story as AI-generated.","causal_attribution":"The journalist's article (one origin), read through Brittle Paper's and the BBC's accounts; The Atlantic page itself was not read. The Sunday date is the BBC's."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'the prize is reviewing his winning story'; 'The Caine Prize said in a statement that it is its responsibility to look into such claims, and that it is taking a “human centred approach” that supports writers during the process. It added that the process has begun'; 'launched an investigation as soon as they learned of Vara’s inquiry'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'as part of an internal investigation for the Caine Prize'; 'would be sending in documentation about his various drafts and there were ongoing conversations with all the judges and The Shallow Tales Review'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The Caine Prize began a review of the winning story, which its chair told the journalist was launched as soon as the prize learned of her inquiry: it said it was its responsibility to look into such claims, and its chair said the author would send documentation of his drafts and that the prize was talking to the judges and to the story's first publisher.","causal_attribution":"The prize's own statement and its chair's interview (one origin: the Caine Prize). No finding is reported."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'they did have evidence of real human investigation of it before tainting the prize and tainting this winner'; 'against is it being used as a final arbiter in this case'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The prize chair told the BBC that The Atlantic should have done more human investigation before tainting the prize and the winner, and that she was against a detector being the final arbiter in this case.","causal_attribution":"The chair's own words in a BBC interview (one origin)."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'For the avoidance of doubt, I wrote The Blue Fighter,\" he posted on X'; 'had \"a concrete, documented history\" about the story's inspiration'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'literary agency has said it is confident the story is his own work'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The author denied using AI to write the story and said he had a documented history of its inspiration and development; his literary agency said it was confident the story was his own work.","causal_attribution":"The author's own statement and his agency's (one side of the dispute); whether AI was used is unestablished."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Pangram's internal research showed its assessments were rarely wrong'; 'was \"not going to be 100% accurate\"'; 'she had also used her own judgment'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Vara closes by saying she may well be wrong.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The journalist said Pangram's internal research shows its assessments are rarely wrong and that she also relied on her own judgement, while conceding that no AI-detection product is fully accurate.","causal_attribution":"The journalist's own account (one origin), reported by the BBC interview and Brittle Paper's summary of the article."}],"effects":[{"label":"a prize-winning story placed under the Caine Prize's review, with the author asked to document his drafts, after a published AI-detector accusation","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"},{"label":"a prize winner publicly accused of submitting an AI-written story on the strength of an AI-detector scan","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm4g1rekpgnjo","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-14 (live, HTTP 200; datePublished 13 October 2026). BBC's own Front Row and Newsday interviews with the prize chair, the journalist and the author, plus the author's X statement.","independence_group":"bbc-front-row"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://brittlepaper.com/2026/10/african-literary-community-pushes-back-on-the-atlantics-ai-claims-about-10000-caine-prize-winner-simbarashe-steyn-kundizeza/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-14 (live, HTTP 200; dated 13 October 2026). Summarises The Atlantic's article and quotes the Caine Prize statement; The Atlantic page itself returned HTTP 403.","independence_group":"brittle-paper"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["work"],"unknowns":["Whether generative AI was used to write the story; the author denies it and the prize has announced no finding.","The outcome of the Caine Prize review and whether the prize will be withdrawn.","The Atlantic's article was not read directly (HTTP 403); its methods are known through the BBC's and Brittle Paper's accounts.","Any personal or financial effect on the author beyond the public accusation and the review."],"geography":{"basis":"No source states where the accusation, the review or the author is located for this case. The prize is the Caine Prize for African Writing and the author is described as Zimbabwean, but nationality and the publisher's or prize's base are not used to locate the event.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a contextual case: an AI-text detector's output about a prize-winning story was the central evidence of a national magazine's accusation; the Caine Prize opened a review when it learned of the journalist's inquiry and asked the author for his drafts (BBC; Brittle Paper). AI authorship is disputed and unproven; the author's denial and the prize chair's objection to detector evidence are recorded. Low severity; the author is not named.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-14"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The output: a Pangram AI-text detector scan that flagged almost the entire winning story as AI-generated, which was the central evidence of The Atlantic's article (c1; Brittle Paper; BBC). The connection to the harm: the Caine Prize began a review when it learned of the journalist's inquiry, which rested on the scan, and continued it after the article of the story and asked the author for documentation of his drafts (c2), and its chair said the article had tainted the winner (c3). The detector's output is a claim about the author's text; whether it is correct is disputed, as the author denies using AI (c4) and the prize chair rejects a detector as the final arbiter. The Atlantic page itself was not read, so the scan is known through the BBC's and Brittle Paper's accounts (made_claim_about).","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["made_claim_about"]},"name":"Caine Prize reviews its 2026 winning story after a Pangram AI-detector scan cited by The Atlantic flagged it as AI-generated; the author denies using AI","summary":"A week after a Zimbabwean writer won the £10,000 2026 Caine Prize for African Writing, The Atlantic published an article on Sunday 11 October 2026 whose central evidence was a scan by Pangram, an AI-text detection tool, flagging almost the entire winning story as AI-generated. The Caine Prize said it had begun a review: according to its chair, the author would send documentation of his drafts and the prize was talking to the judges and to the magazine that first published the story. The chair told the BBC that The Atlantic had published before a full investigation, tainting the prize and the winner, and said a detector should not be the final arbiter. The author denied using AI and said he had a documented history of the story's development; his literary agency said it was confident the story was his own work. No finding has been announced.","incidentDate":"2026-10-11","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"day","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2026-10-13","aiSystem":"Pangram, an AI-text detection tool, used by The Atlantic's journalist to scan the winning story (BBC; Brittle Paper); the alleged use of generative AI to write the story is disputed","aiProduct":"Pangram AI-text detector","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["reputational_harm","professional_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"A prize-winning author was publicly accused, on the strength of an AI-text detector's scan reported by The Atlantic, of submitting an AI-written story; the Caine Prize opened a review of the winning story and asked for documentation of his drafts, and the prize chair said the article had tainted the winner (BBC; Brittle Paper). The author denies using AI.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person: the prize winner whose story was flagged by the detector and placed under the prize's review (BBC; Brittle Paper). Writers who commented on social media are not counted.","victimAgeRange":"adult","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"investigation_opened","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm4g1rekpgnjo","primarySourceLabel":"BBC News, 13 October 2026: Zimbabwean author denies using AI to write award-winning story","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-14T03:12:41.50207+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-14T03:12:41.50207+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["ai-text-detector","pangram","literary-prize","caine-prize","ai-authorship-accusation","disputed"]}]}