{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-10-24T07:34:14.422Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"damages","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"","evidence":"","year":"unknown","response":"lawsuit","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":2,"coverage":{"cases":2,"countries":0,"languages":2,"unknownLocation":2,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":2,"lawsuits":2,"regulatory":0,"minors":0,"coreRelations":2,"contextualRelations":0,"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":"2026-guangzhou-court-treble-damages-clothing-shop-ai-generated-product-photos-misled-online-buyer","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"通过某购物平台向某服装公司经营的店铺购买两件女士上衣，共支付411元。 ... 商家答复“我们店铺的图片都是实物拍摄”，并提供了模特身高、体重及尺码信息。","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"According to the Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court's typical-case release of 12 March 2026, as reported, a buyer paid 411 yuan on a shopping platform for two women's tops from a shop run by a clothing company; before buying, the buyer asked whether the model photos and clothes were real shots, and the seller replied that all the shop's pictures were real photographs and gave the model's height, weight and size.","causal_attribution":"The court's account of the facts, relayed by one outlet."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"实物与宣传图片存在显著差异，两件服装在花纹、版型、造型等方面与图片有明显不同。经审查，案涉商品图片均系“AI”生成，商品的详情页面均仅有“AI”图片，没有实物图片或照片，也未有案涉图片系“AI”生成的说明、提示或标识。","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"案涉服装在花纹、版型等方面与AI宣传图的差异“已远超‘合理美化’‘适度修图’和‘细微差异’的边界”","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"According to the court's account, the garments received differed markedly from the product pictures in pattern, cut and style; on review the pictures were all AI-generated, the product pages carried only AI images with no real photographs, and nothing said or indicated that the images were AI-generated.","causal_attribution":"The court found the images were AI-generated and differed significantly from the goods."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"认为商家构成欺诈，故诉请退货退款并要求三倍赔偿。","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The buyer considered the seller's conduct fraud and sued for return of the goods, a refund and treble damages.","causal_attribution":"The buyer's claim as described in the court's release."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"经营者对利用人工智能技术生成的介绍、宣传等内容，负有审查义务。 ... 某服装公司利用“AI”技术生成与实物差异显著的图片，并在消费者询问时虚假陈述，存在明显的欺诈故意，应承担三倍赔偿责任。","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"法院确立了一条裁判规则：经营者对利用AI技术生成的宣传内容负有审查义务，应确保其客观、准确反映实际状况；若AI生成图片与实物存在显著差异且未如实告知，导致消费者陷入错误认识而购买，构成消费欺诈。","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The court held that a business has a duty to review content it generates with AI, that undisclosed AI-generated information differing significantly from the goods which leads a consumer to buy constitutes consumer fraud, and that the clothing company, which used AI to generate pictures differing significantly from the goods and made a false statement when asked, had a clear intent to defraud and must pay treble compensation.","causal_attribution":"The court's holding, relayed from its release."}],"effects":[{"label":"a buyer paid for two tops that differed markedly from the shop's AI-generated product pictures, which the seller had called real photographs, court finds","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.yzwb.net/news/sh/202603/t20260313_331265.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"zh","translation_note":"Read in Chinese on 2026-10-24; quoted passages were translated into English by the research agent (an AI), not by a human translator. Yangtse Evening Post (Ziniu News) report of 13 March 2026 relaying the Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court's 12 March 2026 release of ten consumer-protection typical cases; read in full (HTTP 200).","independence_group":"guangzhou-intermediate-court-consumer-cases-release-2026-03-12"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.chinanews.com.cn/m/cj/2026/10-22/10719197.shtml","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"zh","translation_note":"Read in Chinese on 2026-10-24; quoted passages were translated into English by the research agent (an AI), not by a human translator. China News Service investigation of 22 October 2026 into AI-generated clothing models on shopping platforms, which summarises the same court typical case; read in full (HTTP 200). It draws on the same court release as s1, so the two share one independence group.","independence_group":"guangzhou-intermediate-court-consumer-cases-release-2026-03-12"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["everyday_life","justice"],"unknowns":["When the purchase and the judgment took place; the release gives neither, and the record dates the case by the release of 12 March 2026.","Which court decided the case at first instance, whether it went on appeal, and the case number.","The amount of the compensation awarded and whether the refund for return was granted as claimed.","Which shopping platform and shop were involved and which image tool generated the pictures.","How the court established that the pictures were AI-generated."],"geography":{"basis":"The case was released by the Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court in China. The relayed release does not say where the buyer or the shop was or which court heard the case at first instance, so no event or affected-person country is recorded.","court_countries":["CN"],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published under the 2026-10-11 operator-published-content ruling: a court found that a shop's product pictures were all AI-generated and differed markedly from the goods, that a described buyer relied on them (and on the seller's claim that they were real photographs) when buying two tops, and that this was consumer fraud warranting treble compensation. The account rests on the court's typical-case release as relayed by two outlets.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-24"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The court found, on review, that all the shop's product pictures were AI-generated, that they differed markedly from the garments in pattern, cut and style, and that the product pages showed no real photographs and no AI label. The buyer relied on those pictures, and on the seller's false answer that they were real photographs, when paying 411 yuan; the court held that the AI-generated pictures together with the false statement deceived the buyer into the purchase. The release as relayed does not say which image tool was used or how the court established that the pictures were AI-generated.","status":"supported"},"person_relations":["communicated_with"]},"name":"Chinese court orders clothing shop to pay treble damages after its AI-generated product photos, claimed as real, misled an online buyer","summary":"In a consumer-protection typical case released on 12 March 2026, the Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court described a buyer who paid 411 yuan on a shopping platform for two women's tops after asking whether the model photos were real and being told that all the shop's pictures were real photographs. The garments that arrived differed markedly from the pictures in pattern, cut and style, and on review the pictures were all AI-generated, with no real photographs and no AI label on the product pages. The buyer sued for a refund and treble damages. The court held that businesses must review content they generate with AI, that undisclosed AI images differing significantly from the goods which lead a consumer to buy amount to consumer fraud, and that the clothing company must pay treble compensation. The release as relayed does not give the dates, the court of first instance or the amount.","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"unknown","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2026-03-12","aiSystem":"An unidentified image-generation tool used by an online clothing shop to produce all its product pictures, including model photos (per the court's typical-case release as reported)","aiProduct":"Unidentified image tool","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["financial_loss"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"According to a Chinese court's typical-case release, a buyer paid 411 yuan for two tops relying on a shop's product pictures, which the shop called real photographs; the court found the pictures were AI-generated and differed markedly from the goods, held this was consumer fraud and ordered treble compensation.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"The court's release, as relayed, describes one buyer who paid 411 yuan for two tops; no other buyers are described.","victimAgeRange":"unknown","jurisdiction":"CN","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"lawsuit_filed","outcomeStatus":"resolved","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.yzwb.net/news/sh/202603/t20260313_331265.html","primarySourceLabel":"Yangtse Evening Post (Ziniu News), 13 Mar 2026: online clothes bought from AI-generated pictures; shop ordered to pay treble damages for fraud","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-24T03:07:42.681363+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-24T03:14:10.733674+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["ai-generated-images","online-shopping","consumer-fraud","court-ruling","product-listing","china"]},{"id":"2026-doe-v-xai-grok-abuse-survivor-known-series-images","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Using pre-existing and known CSAM involving Plaintiff, Grok generated new CSAM,'; 'xAI, using Grok, has generated images depicting Plaintiff and the child pornography'; 'The Canadian Centre for Child Protection has identified AI-generated CSAM on xAI'; '(hereinafter, “NCMEC”) in the early 2000s'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'attorneys for the plaintiff stated that the Canadian Centre for Child Protection used images’ fingerprints to identify AI-generated CSAM on X that depicted their client.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"},{"locator":"'that Grok generated new sexually explicit images of her likeness'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"'It also claims “xAI, using Grok, has generated images depicting Plaintiff and the child pornography series in which she is the victim.”'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"}],"assertion":"The complaint alleges that Grok generated new child sexual abuse images depicting the plaintiff, an adult survivor whose childhood abuse was recorded in a known image series identified by NCMEC in the early 2000s, and that the Canadian Centre for Child Protection has identified AI-generated abuse images of her on xAI's service.","causal_attribution":"Alleged by the plaintiff. The complaint does not say when the images were generated, who prompted them, or how many there were; no court has ruled on the allegations and xAI has not responded publicly."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'CSAM depicting Plaintiff with its longstanding well-known hash values has been used'; 'as a part of the dataset used by xAI.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'The complaint alleges that same material was part of the dataset xAI used to build Grok’s image and video generating capabilities'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"The complaint alleges that the known abuse images of the plaintiff, with their long-established hash values, were part of the dataset xAI used for Grok.","causal_attribution":"Allegation about training data; the complaint does not describe how this was established."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Each time Grok created new CSAM concerning Plaintiff, Grok caused her a new'; 'compounding the already extensive harm Plaintiff suffered.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Our client has lived for nearly two decades knowing that images of the worst thing that ever happened to her are circulating among predators online, and that they can resurface at any moment,'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"The complaint says each new image Grok created or re-published of the plaintiff caused her a new personal injury, compounding the harm she already suffered from the circulation of her abuse images; her counsel says she has lived for nearly two decades knowing the images circulate and can resurface at any moment.","causal_attribution":"The plaintiff's and counsel's characterization of her injury; no specific symptoms or consequences are described."},{"id":"c4","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Filed 08/26/26'; 'Plaintiff seeks relief under the federal cause of action known as “Masha’s Law,”'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Date Filed: Aug. 26, 2026'; 'Sep 22, 2026'; 'Order Relating Case'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The plaintiff filed the proposed nationwide class action against X.AI Corp. and X.AI LLC on 26 August 2026 in the Northern District of California, under Masha's Law (18 U.S.C. § 2255) and 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(f); an order relating the case was entered on 22 September 2026.","causal_attribution":"Procedural record only."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Neither xAI nor SpaceX, which acquired the company in February, returned requests for comment regarding the lawsuit.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"},{"locator":"'On Jan. 14, after the period tracked by the center, Musk wrote on X that he was “not aware of any naked underage images of Grok. Literally zero.”'","relation":"context","source_id":"s5"}],"assertion":"Neither xAI nor SpaceX, which acquired xAI in February 2026, responded to the Guardian's request for comment; Musk had written on X on 14 January 2026 that he was not aware of any naked underage images generated by Grok.","causal_attribution":"Response record; Musk's statement is general and does not address this plaintiff."}],"effects":[{"label":"Grok allegedly generated new sexual-abuse images depicting an identified adult survivor of childhood abuse, from her known abuse image series","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"},{"label":"the survivor says each new image caused her a new injury on top of two decades of her abuse images circulating","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.477196/gov.uscourts.cand.477196.1.0_1.pdf","kind":"court_filing","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Class Action Complaint, Doe 1 v. X.AI Corp., No. 5:26-cv-09016 (N.D. Cal., San Jose), ECF 1, filed 26 August 2026; RECAP PDF (23 pages) read in full on 2026-09-29 (HTTP 200). The plaintiff's allegations, not findings; several key facts are pleaded without dates.","independence_group":"plaintiff-account"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/74706848/doe-1-v-xai-corp/","kind":"court_docket","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"CourtListener docket read newest-first on 2026-09-29 (HTTP 200; last known filing 28 Sept 2026). Procedural facts only; the 22 September order relating the case was not read.","independence_group":"ndcal-court-record"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://girardsharp.com/child-sexual-abuse-survivor-files-class-action-against-xai-alleging-grok-was-trained-on-her-abuse-material-and-generated-new-csam/","kind":"press_release","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Plaintiff's counsel Girard Sharp press release, 27 August 2026, read live on 2026-09-29 (HTTP 200).","independence_group":"plaintiff-account"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://www.irishexaminer.com/world/arid-41906197.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"The Guardian's report by Nick Robins-Early (3 September 2026), read in the Irish Examiner's syndicated copy credited to The Guardian on 2026-09-29 (HTTP 200); the theguardian.com URL was not located. It relays the complaint and interviews plaintiff's counsel.","independence_group":"plaintiff-account"},{"id":"s5","url":"https://cyberscoop.com/xai-grok-csam-class-action-lawsuit/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"CyberScoop, Derek B. Johnson, 27 August 2026, read live on 2026-09-29 (HTTP 200). Relays the complaint; its paraphrase that the hash values 'have shown up in deepfakes created with Grok and spread on X' is broader than the complaint's wording and is not relied on.","independence_group":"plaintiff-account"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["privacy"],"unknowns":["When the images of the plaintiff were generated or posted, how many there were, and who prompted them.","Whether the Canadian Centre for Child Protection's identification has been confirmed by any source other than the plaintiff's filing and counsel.","The plaintiff's country of residence.","xAI's response to the allegations."],"geography":{"basis":"The complaint says only that the plaintiff resides outside California; her country and where the images were generated or posted are not stated. The case is in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.","court_countries":["US"],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a concrete adverse account of an identified person depicted in AI-generated abuse images, resting on the plaintiff's federal complaint, counsel's statements and news reports relaying them. All facts about Grok's role are allegations; nothing identifying the plaintiff and no description of the images is recorded.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-29"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The complaint alleges Grok generated the images and that the Canadian Centre for Child Protection identified AI-generated images of her on xAI's service; counsel told the Guardian the identification used the series' hash fingerprints. No independent confirmation of the identification or of which prompts produced the images was inspected.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["depicted_or_impersonated"]},"name":"Doe 1 v. xAI: an adult survivor of childhood sexual abuse alleges Grok generated new abuse images of her from her known, hashed abuse series, which she says xAI used as training data","summary":"A survivor who was sexually abused as a preschool-aged child and now sues individually under the pseudonym Jane Doe 1, and whose abuse images have circulated online since the early 2000s as a series known to NCMEC, sued xAI on 26 August 2026 in the Northern District of California. Her complaint alleges that those known images were part of the dataset xAI used for Grok and that Grok generated new abuse images depicting her; her lawyers say the Canadian Centre for Child Protection used the series' hash fingerprints to identify AI-generated images of her on X. The complaint says each new image caused her a new injury. It seeks damages under Masha's Law for a proposed class of people whose childhood images Grok altered into abuse material. The complaint does not say when the images of her were made or who prompted them. xAI did not respond to requests for comment, and no court has ruled on the allegations.","incidentKind":"ongoing_experience","incidentDatePrecision":"unknown","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2026-08-26","aiSystem":"Grok image generation on X and xAI's services (the complaint does not identify the specific tool or model version used for the images of the plaintiff)","aiProduct":"Grok","aiCompany":"xAI (X.AI Corp. and X.AI LLC; acquired by SpaceX in February 2026)","severity":"high","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["exploitation_or_abuse"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The plaintiff alleges that Grok generated new abuse images depicting her from her known childhood abuse series and that each new image caused her a new injury; her counsel describes two decades of living with the images' circulation (the plaintiff's complaint and counsel; no court finding).","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"documented_minimum","affectedCountEvidence":"The named plaintiff (1 person depicted). The proposed class of 'at least thousands' is counsel's estimate of class membership and is not counted.","victimAgeRange":"adult","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"lawsuit_ongoing","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.477196/gov.uscourts.cand.477196.1.0_1.pdf","primarySourceLabel":"Class Action Complaint, Doe 1 v. X.AI Corp., No. 5:26-cv-09016 (N.D. Cal.), filed 26 August 2026","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-29T09:04:05.310491+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:17:35.914162+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["xai","grok","csam","image-generation","training-data","masha's-law","class-action","survivor","depicted"]}]}