{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-10-23T16:30:44.624Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"defamation","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"contextual","evidence":"","year":"","response":"","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":7,"coverage":{"cases":7,"countries":2,"languages":5,"unknownLocation":5,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":1,"lawsuits":3,"regulatory":1,"minors":0,"coreRelations":0,"contextualRelations":7,"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-nanjing-courts-rule-baidu-ai-answer-falsely-saying-a-lawyer-was-sentenced-to-prison-defamed-him-written-apology-ordered","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'2024年9月30日，在百度搜索中搜索'; '被判处有期徒刑三年'; '的穿着律师袍的照片展示在回答内容当中'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'当他点开百度的推荐语句时，“AI智能回答”依然给出“三年有期徒刑”的虚假内容'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"According to the first-instance judgment as quoted by the press, on 30 September 2024 Baidu search's AI smart answer, asked how many years the lawyer had been sentenced to, stated that he had been sentenced to three years' imprisonment for a criminal offence and displayed his photograph in a lawyer's robe.","causal_attribution":"The courts' findings as reported; the AI answer is the operator's own generated output."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'通过百度推广咨询热线、北京政务热线和多个邮箱反复投诉'; '上述核心谣言却从未彻底清除'; '严重干扰了'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The lawyer says he complained repeatedly to Baidu through hotlines and email without the core false content being fully removed, and that it seriously disrupted his work and life.","causal_attribution":"The lawyer's own account to Jiaohuidian."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'系被告百度公司对搜索内容通过 AI 技术将文字内容与图片加工合成'; '百度公司主观上存有过错，该搜索发布内容的行为造成了原告的名誉受损'; '百度公司采用书面道歉信的形式向原告道歉为宜'; '未能提交证据证明，故对该项诉求不予支持'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'南京江北新区人民法院一审认定百度构成名誉侵权'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The Jiangbei New Area People's Court found that Baidu's AI answer combined text and the lawyer's picture through AI into false, disparaging content aimed at him, that Baidu was at fault and that this was defamation; it ordered a written apology and rejected the claims for losses and emotional damages for lack of evidence.","causal_attribution":"The court's finding as quoted from the judgment; the judgment itself was not inspected."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'所有的人工智能都会产生幻觉'; '采用了大量的诱导性提问，而这给人工智能产生一种错误的幻觉'; '2026年3月12日，南京中院二审驳回了百度公司上诉，维持了一审判决。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'南京市中级人民法院二审驳回上诉，维持原判'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Baidu argued that AI hallucinations are unforeseeable and that the lawyer used leading questions; the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court dismissed its appeal on 12 March 2026.","causal_attribution":"Baidu's argument and the appellate result as reported."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'终审判决生效后，百度公司未在法定期限内履行道歉义务'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'通过执行，百度最终进行了书面道歉'; '为此百度深表歉意'; '百度申请了再审，目前还未确定再审是否通过'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"After Baidu did not apologise within the deadline, the lawyer applied for enforcement; in September 2026 he said he had received Baidu's written apology through enforcement, and that Baidu had applied for a retrial.","causal_attribution":"The lawyer's account and the quoted apology text."}],"effects":[{"label":"false AI search answer stating that a practising lawyer had been sentenced to prison, shown with his photograph, which a court found lowered his social standing","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://finance.sina.com.cn/stock/t/2026-05-09/doc-inhxfxrp7102110.shtml","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"zh","translation_note":"Read in Chinese on 2026-10-22 from the publisher page. Translated by the research agent (an AI); quotations are Chinese originals and English renderings are the agent's translations. The report quotes the first-instance judgment and the appeal hearing; ThePaper later attributes the original reporting to Red Star News.","independence_group":"red-star-news-baidu-ai-lawyer-case"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://jsnews.jschina.com.cn/jsyw/202605/t20260512_s6a033847e4b04d95bbc5ad9a.shtml","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"zh","translation_note":"Read in Chinese on 2026-10-22 from the publisher page. Translated by the research agent (an AI); quotations are Chinese originals and English renderings are the agent's translations. Jiaohuidian (Xinhua Daily group) reported the case from its own interview with the lawyer and the court outcome.","independence_group":"jiaohuidian-baidu-ai-lawyer-case"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_34124925","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"zh","translation_note":"Read in Chinese on 2026-10-22 from the publisher page. Translated by the research agent (an AI); quotations are Chinese originals and English renderings are the agent's translations. A Red Star News report on ThePaper's account platform, so it shares the Red Star group.","independence_group":"red-star-news-baidu-ai-lawyer-case"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["work","justice"],"unknowns":["The exact wording and dates of both judgments; they were not inspected directly.","Whether Baidu's retrial application has been accepted.","How many people saw the false answer."],"geography":{"basis":"The courts are in Nanjing, China, and the affected person is a lawyer practising in Nanjing. The sources do not say where the searches were made, so no event country is recorded.","court_countries":["CN"],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":["CN"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a concrete case in which an AI search answer stated a false criminal sentence about a named practising lawyer and a court, upheld on appeal, found the operator liable for defamation and ordered a written apology. The court findings are reported through two independent press chains; the judgments were not inspected.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-22"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The first-instance judgment, as quoted in the press, finds that Baidu search's AI smart answer itself generated the statement that the lawyer had been sentenced to three years' imprisonment and combined it with his photograph, and that this AI-generated content lowered his social standing. The appellate court upheld that finding. Baidu did not deny that its AI produced the answer; it argued that AI hallucinations are unforeseeable.","status":"supported"},"person_relations":["made_claim_about"]},"name":"Nanjing courts rule Baidu's AI search answer falsely saying a lawyer was sentenced to prison defamed him; written apology ordered and upheld on appeal","summary":"A practising lawyer in Nanjing, China, found in September 2024 that Baidu search's 'AI smart answer' (AI 智能回答) feature, asked how many years he had been sentenced to, answered that he had been sentenced to three years in prison for a criminal offence and showed his photograph in a lawyer's robe. According to the first-instance judgment as quoted in the press, the answer was produced on 30 September 2024. The lawyer says he complained repeatedly to Baidu by letter, hotline and email without the content being fully removed, and he sued. The Jiangbei New Area People's Court in Nanjing found that Baidu had combined text and his picture through AI into false, disparaging content aimed at him, that Baidu was at fault, and that this was defamation; it ordered a written apology and rejected his claims for lost income and emotional damages for lack of evidence. Baidu argued that AI hallucinations could not be foreseen. The Nanjing Intermediate People's Court dismissed Baidu's appeal on 12 March 2026. The lawyer applied for enforcement when no apology came, and in September 2026 said he had received Baidu's written apology; Baidu has applied for a retrial.","incidentDate":"2024-09-30","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"day","exposurePattern":"repeated_interactions","reportedDate":"2026-05-09","aiSystem":"Baidu search's AI smart answer (AI 智能回答), a generative answer feature shown above search results in the Baidu app and website","aiProduct":"Baidu AI smart answer","aiCompany":"Baidu","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["reputational_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"Courts in Nanjing found that Baidu's AI search answer falsely stating a lawyer had been sentenced to prison, shown with his photograph, lowered his social standing and was defamation; they ordered a written apology.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"established","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person: the lawyer about whom the AI answer made the false statement and whom the courts found defamed. Exact 1.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"CN","platformType":"other","outcomeStatus":"resolved","primarySourceUrl":"https://finance.sina.com.cn/stock/t/2026-05-09/doc-inhxfxrp7102110.shtml","primarySourceLabel":"Sina Finance, 9 May 2026: Baidu AI said a lawyer was sentenced; court finds infringement and orders a written apology","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-22T03:14:56.60197+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-22T03:14:56.60197+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["ai-search-answer","defamation","court-ruling","false-criminal-allegation","hallucination"]},{"id":"2026-germany-court-bars-google-ai-mode-answer-falsely-calling-doctor-convicted-sex-offender","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Ende August 2026 wies ihn ein ärztlicher Kollege darauf hin, was passiert, wenn man seinen Namen zusammen mit dem Suchbegriff \"Freistellung\" bei Google eingibt'; 'Der KI-Modus gab eine zusammenhängende Darstellung aus, die wie ein Tatsachenbericht klang.'; 'Ein Gericht hätte ihn wegen sexueller Nötigung zu einer Bewährungsstrafe verurteilt'; 'wäre deshalb freigestellt und gekündigt worden'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"At the end of August 2026 a colleague told the physician that searching his name with the word for suspension in Google's AI Mode produced a connected account that read like a factual report: that he had been suspended and dismissed and had received a suspended sentence for sexual coercion.","causal_attribution":"The AI Mode output as described by beck-aktuell from the court decision; the output itself was not inspected."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Gegen ihn gab es nie eine Strafanzeige wegen sexueller Nötigung, kein Strafverfahren und keine Verurteilung.'; 'Die KI hatte vielmehr offenbar Informationen über einen anderen früheren leitenden Mitarbeiter derselben Klinik mit seinem Namen verknüpft.'; 'nannten den Namen des beschuldigten Arztes nicht'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"None of the claims concerned him: there was never a criminal complaint, proceeding or conviction against him; the AI apparently linked information about another former senior employee of the same hospital to his name, and the newspaper articles Google linked as sources did not name him.","causal_attribution":"beck-aktuell's account of the case; the court found the statements attributed to him offences that concerned another person (c4)."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Der Mediziner forderte noch Ende August die Löschung dieser Ergebnisse.'; 'Doch Google antwortete, man habe die Beanstandung geprüft und werde keine Maßnahmen einleiten.'; 'die KI-generierten Inhalte blieben abrufbar'; 'Auch eine Abmahnung durch die Kölner Kanzlei Höcker vom selben Tag blieb ohne Ergebnis'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"He asked Google to delete the results at the end of August; Google replied that it had reviewed the complaint and would take no action, and a warning letter from his lawyers the same day had no effect.","causal_attribution":"As reported by beck-aktuell; Google's own statement was not inspected."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Das LG Aachen hat Google Ireland Limited nun per einstweiliger Verfügung untersagt, die falschen Behauptungen weiter über den KI-Modus zu verbreiten (Beschluss vom 24.09.2026 - 8 O 268/26).'; 'indem sie ihm strafrechtliche Vorwürfe und arbeitsrechtliche Konsequenzen zuordneten, die tatsächlich eine andere Person beträfen'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Das Landgericht Aachen untersagte dem Technologiekonzern Google mit Beschluss vom 24. September 2026 (Az. 8 O 268/26), im KI-Modus Falschbehauptungen über einen Arzt zu verbreiten.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"By a decision of 24 September 2026 (8 O 268/26) the Aachen Regional Court issued a preliminary injunction barring Google Ireland Limited from further spreading the false claims through AI Mode, holding that the AI-generated texts violated his personality rights by attributing to him criminal accusations and employment consequences that concerned another person, and that Google is responsible for the answers of its AI search.","causal_attribution":"The court's decision as reported; the decision text itself was not inspected. Both reports relay the same decision."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Die Falschinformationen seien öffentlich sichtbar und für jeden zugänglich.'; 'obwohl sie geeignet seien, den Arzt in seiner beruflichen Ehre und seinem sozialen Ansehen erheblich zu schädigen'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The court found the false statements publicly visible and capable of seriously damaging his professional honour and social standing, and noted that Google had done nothing to remove them despite his request and the warning letter.","causal_attribution":"The court's reasoning as reported by beck-aktuell."}],"effects":[{"label":"AI search answer falsely presenting him as convicted of sexual coercion and dismissed","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"},{"label":"false claims left online after Google declined his removal request","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.beck-aktuell.de/heute-im-recht/rechtsprechung/lg-aachen-8o26826-haftung-falsche-ki-aussage-google-stoererin-chefarzt-sexualstraftaeter-2026-10-08","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"de","translation_note":"Read in German on 2026-10-15 (live page, HTTP 200; beck-aktuell, 8 October 2026, with an editorial note of 12 October 2026 that the description of his former post was slightly changed at his lawyer's request). Legal news report of the court's decision; translated by the research agent (an AI), no human translation.","independence_group":"lg-aachen-8-o-268-26"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.ad-hoc-news.de/wissenschaft/google-ki-im-visier-landgericht-aachen-untersagt-falsche-arztbehauptung/70304380","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"de","translation_note":"Read in German on 2026-10-15 (live page, HTTP 200; ad-hoc-news.de, 12 October 2026). A round-up article whose Aachen paragraph restates the decision's date, file number and legal basis; it adds no independent reporting. Translated by the research agent (an AI).","independence_group":"lg-aachen-8-o-268-26"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["work","justice","privacy"],"unknowns":["The exact wording of the AI Mode answer and how many people saw it.","Whether Google has complied, objected or appealed; the decision is an interim injunction issued without a hearing.","Whether the false answer affected his employment or professional standing in practice; he left the chief-physician post in summer 2026 for reasons not connected in any source to the AI answer.","When AI Mode first produced the answer: the end of August 2026 is when a colleague pointed it out, and incident_date records that month."],"geography":{"basis":"beck-aktuell says he worked as a chief physician at a German hospital (an einem deutschen Klinikum) and that the Aachen Regional Court issued the injunction, so the court country is DE and the affected person's country is DE by his work at a German hospital. No source says where the searches that displayed the answer were made, so the event country stays unknown.","court_countries":["DE"],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":["DE"]},"publication":{"basis":"A German court issued an injunction against Google after its AI Mode attributed another person's sexual-coercion conviction and dismissal to a physician, searched by name, who had no such record, and Google refused his removal request. Contextual relation made_claim_about; the case adds a court injunction holding the search provider responsible for its AI answer. The physician is not named.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-15"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"Google's AI Mode itself generated the statements: according to beck-aktuell's report of the decision, a search for his name with the word for suspension produced a connected account attributing a conviction for sexual coercion and a dismissal to him, apparently by linking facts about another former employee of the same hospital to his name, while the linked source articles did not name him. The Aachen Regional Court held that these AI-generated texts violated his personality rights and that Google is responsible for them. The answer was not inspected directly; it is known through the reported decision.","status":"supported"},"person_relations":["made_claim_about"]},"name":"German court bars Google from repeating an AI Mode answer that falsely called a doctor a convicted sex offender","summary":"In late August 2026 a colleague told a German physician, until that summer a chief physician at a hospital, that searching his name with the word for suspension in Google's AI Mode produced what read like a factual report: that he had been suspended and dismissed and had received a suspended sentence for sexual coercion. According to legal news site beck-aktuell, none of it concerned him; the AI had apparently attached facts about another former senior employee of the same hospital to his name, and the newspaper articles it linked as sources did not name him. Google said it had reviewed his complaint and would take no action, and a lawyer's warning letter also failed. On 24 September 2026 the Aachen Regional Court issued a preliminary injunction (8 O 268/26) barring Google Ireland Limited from spreading the claims through AI Mode, finding that they violated his personality rights and that Google is responsible for its AI search answers.","incidentDate":"2026-08-01","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"month","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2026-10-08","aiSystem":"Google Search AI Mode (KI-Modus), which generated an answer about the physician when his name was searched","aiProduct":"Google AI Mode","aiCompany":"Google","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["reputational_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"Google's AI Mode answered searches for a physician's name with a false account that he had been convicted of sexual coercion and dismissed; Google declined to remove it until a court ordered it to stop.","frameworkFacets":[],"pathwayDirection":"outward","causationStatus":"established","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person, the physician about whom AI Mode made the false claims and who obtained the injunction.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"DE","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"lawsuit_ongoing","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.beck-aktuell.de/heute-im-recht/rechtsprechung/lg-aachen-8o26826-haftung-falsche-ki-aussage-google-stoererin-chefarzt-sexualstraftaeter-2026-10-08","primarySourceLabel":"beck-aktuell, 8 October 2026: Google muss KI-Halluzination löschen (German)","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-15T03:20:24.866709+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-15T03:20:24.866709+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["google","ai-mode","defamation","false-accusation","court-injunction","germany"]},{"id":"2026-switzerland-grok-generated-sexist-insults-about-finance-minister-criminal-complaint-bern-investigation","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Am 10. März hat es auch eine Schweizer Politikerin erwischt: Bundesrätin Karin Keller-Sutter. Es war der Schweizer Peter P.*, der Grok im Verlauf einer generellen «Roast»-Diskussion mit einem Prompt gezielt animierte'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Ein Nutzer hatte den Bot am 10. März gezielt zu Beleidigungen gegen Keller-Sutter aufgefordert.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'A user of the social network X prompted the AI Grok chatbot to conjure insults against the minister.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"On 10 March 2026 a Swiss X user, during a roast thread, prompted Grok to attack Federal Councillor Karin Keller-Sutter in hard street slang.","causal_attribution":"CH Media's report of the prompt from the post it saw; Keystone-SDA relays Sonntagsblick's report of a user prompting Grok. The prompter's identity is a pseudonym in the sources and is not recorded here."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Mit vulgären Beschimpfungen. Mit beleidigenden Körper- und Charakterangriffen. Mit abwertender und sexualisierter Sprache.' and 'Die sexualisierten Begriffe von Groks Entgleisungen sind im Screenshot des Posts auf X verpixelt.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Grok reagierte mit sexistischen und beleidigenden Aussagen, die öffentlich einsehbar und teilbar waren'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Grok replied on X with vulgar insults, attacks on her body and character, and degrading, sexualised language about Keller-Sutter, and the reply was publicly visible and shareable.","causal_attribution":"CH Media's description of Grok's post from a screenshot; both articles come from the same media group, so the claim rests on one reporting chain."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Keller-Sutter erfuhr am Folgetag davon. Kurz darauf wurde der Beitrag gelöscht.' and '«Es war eine harmlose technische Übung, um zu sehen, was mit diesem Grok möglich ist»'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'Er löschte seinen «Roast»-Prompt und auch die Antwort von Grok.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"Keller-Sutter learned of the post the next day, and the user deleted his prompt and Grok's reply shortly afterwards; the user later told Tamedia it was a harmless technical exercise.","causal_attribution":"CH Media reporting; the user's comment is his own account relayed from Tamedia."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'the Bern public prosecutor's office has opened an investigation over insult and defamation.' and 'The minister’s criminal complaint targets “unknown persons”.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"'le Ministère public bernois a ouvert une enquête pour injures et diffamation.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"},{"locator":"'Inzwischen hat die Bundesrätin Strafanzeige wegen Verleumdung und Beschimpfung eingereicht.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Keller-Sutter filed a criminal complaint against unknown persons, and the Bern public prosecutor's office confirmed to Keystone-SDA that it had opened an investigation for insult and defamation.","causal_attribution":"The prosecutor's confirmation to Keystone-SDA and statements by Keller-Sutter's spokesperson; the investigation has reached no reported finding."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'«Solcher Frauenhass darf nicht als normal oder akzeptabel empfunden werden», wurde Hollenstein zitiert.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'«Der Verbreitung solcher sexistischer Texte muss eine Grenze gesetzt werden'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"Keller-Sutter's spokesperson said such misogyny must not be seen as normal or acceptable, and the finance department said the spread of such sexist texts must be limited.","causal_attribution":"Official statements by the minister's spokesperson and department."}],"effects":[{"label":"sexist and degrading insults about a named minister generated and posted publicly by a chatbot","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"},{"label":"criminal complaint and prosecutor investigation for insult and defamation","claim_id":"c4","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.watson.ch/schweiz/bundesrat/406055717-ki-chatbot-grok-von-elon-musk-beschimpft-keller-sutter-prozess-droht","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"de","translation_note":"Read in German on 2026-10-12 from the publisher page (full article text); the research agent (an AI) translated the passages relied on into English for this record, and no human translator reviewed them. The article credits bzbasel.ch (CH Media).","independence_group":"ch-media"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.aargauerzeitung.ch/schweiz/keller-sutter-reicht-strafanzeige-gegen-elon-musks-ki-grok-ein-ld.4147350","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"de","translation_note":"Read in German on 2026-10-12 from the publisher page (full article text); the research agent (an AI) translated the passages relied on into English for this record, and no human translator reviewed them. Same newsroom group as s1 (CH Media); it relays Tamedia for the complaint and the user's comment.","independence_group":"ch-media"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/various/ai-chatbot-criminal-investigation-following-karin-keller-sutters-complaint/91249480","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-10-12 from the publisher page; swissinfo.ch states that it translates selected news agency copy with automatic translation tools and that a journalist then reviews the translation, so the English text is a reviewed machine translation of a Keystone-SDA report. No further translation by the research agent (an AI) was needed.","independence_group":"keystone-sda"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://www.swissinfo.ch/fre/chatbot-dia%3aenqu%c3%aate-p%c3%a9nale-apr%c3%a8s-la-plainte-de-karin-keller-sutter/91248423","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"fr","translation_note":"Read in French on 2026-10-12 from the publisher page (Keystone-ATS copy); the research agent (an AI) translated the passages relied on into English for this record, and no human translator reviewed them. Same agency as s3.","independence_group":"keystone-sda"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["public_services","everyday_life"],"unknowns":["The full text of Grok's reply as posted; the sources quote parts and describe the rest from a screenshot.","How many people saw or shared the reply before it was deleted.","Whether the investigation has identified anyone or reached any decision, and whether xAI or X responded.","Keller-Sutter's own description of any personal effect; only her spokesperson and department are quoted.","Where the user was when he prompted Grok."],"geography":{"basis":"Keller-Sutter is a member of the Swiss Federal Council and head of its finance department, the office through which the reply targeted her, and the Bern public prosecutor's office opened the investigation. The sources call the user Swiss but do not say where he prompted Grok or where the reply was posted from, so the event country is left unknown; the investigation is not a court proceeding.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":["CH"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published on CH Media's description, from a screenshot, of Grok's own reply on X insulting Federal Councillor Keller-Sutter in sexist and degrading terms after a user asked for a roast, together with Keystone-SDA's report that the Bern prosecutor opened an investigation for insult and defamation on her complaint. The generated reply is the AI output and the public abuse of the named minister is the reported harm. The case adds a criminal investigation by a public prosecutor as a legal outcome. Claims stay reported because each rests on one reporting chain or on official statements.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-12"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"watson (CH Media) describes Grok's own reply on X, from a screenshot of the post: after a user asked for a hard street-slang roast of the minister, Grok answered that it would and wrote vulgar insults, attacks on her body and character, and degrading, sexualised language about her (\"Mit vulgären Beschimpfungen. Mit beleidigenden Körper- und Charakterangriffen. Mit abwertender und sexualisierter Sprache.\"). The Aargauer Zeitung reports that Grok's statements were publicly visible and shareable, and Keystone-SDA reports that a user prompted Grok to produce insults against the minister. The generated reply is the material her criminal complaint for insult and defamation concerns.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["made_claim_about"]},"name":"Switzerland: Grok posted sexist insults about Finance Minister Karin Keller-Sutter on X at a user's prompt; her complaint led to a criminal investigation","summary":"On 10 March 2026, according to CH Media reporting published by watson, a Swiss X user taking part in a \"roast\" thread asked xAI's chatbot Grok to attack Federal Councillor Karin Keller-Sutter, Switzerland's finance minister, in hard street slang. Grok agreed and posted a reply on X with vulgar insults, attacks on her body and character, and degrading, sexualised language. The Aargauer Zeitung reported that the output was publicly visible and shareable, that Keller-Sutter learned of it the next day, and that the post was deleted shortly afterwards; watson reported that the user deleted his prompt and Grok's reply. The finance department first said she was having a criminal complaint for insult examined. Keystone-SDA later reported that she had filed a criminal complaint against unknown persons and that the Bern public prosecutor's office had opened an investigation for insult and defamation. Her spokesperson said such misogyny must not be seen as normal or acceptable. The user told Tamedia, as relayed by the Aargauer Zeitung, that it was a harmless technical exercise. No outcome of the investigation is reported.","incidentDate":"2026-03-10","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"day","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2026-03-15","aiSystem":"Grok, the xAI chatbot that replies to users on X, prompted by an X user during a \"roast\" thread","aiProduct":"Grok","aiCompany":"xAI","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["reputational_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"Grok's reply, posted publicly on X, subjected Keller-Sutter to sexist and degrading insults that the FDP co-president who discussed it with her called a sexist insult of the ugliest and most vulgar kind. Keller-Sutter filed a criminal complaint for insult and defamation, and her spokesperson described the content as misogyny. Her own description of any personal effect is not reported.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person: Karin Keller-Sutter, the target of Grok's reply, who filed the complaint. Other politicians targeted in other users' roast threads are not part of this event and are not counted.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"CH","platformType":"chatbot","outcomeType":"investigation_opened","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.watson.ch/schweiz/bundesrat/406055717-ki-chatbot-grok-von-elon-musk-beschimpft-keller-sutter-prozess-droht","primarySourceLabel":"watson, 15 March 2026: KI-Chatbot Grok von Elon Musk beschimpft Keller-Sutter, Prozess droht","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-12T03:13:18.439789+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-12T03:13:18.439789+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["grok","x","chatbot","insult","defamation","misogyny","switzerland","criminal-complaint","public-official","made-claim-about"]},{"id":"2025-us-senator-blackburn-google-gemma-reported-fabricated-sexual-misconduct-allegation","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"When prompted with, ‘Has Marsha Blackburn been accused of rape?’ Gemma produced the following entirely false response","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"There has never been such an accusation, there is no such individual, and there are no such news stories.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"pressured him to obtain prescription drugs for her and that the relationship involved non-consensual acts.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"“None of this is true, not even the campaign year which was actually 1998,” Blackburn wrote.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Senator Marsha Blackburn says that Google's Gemma model, asked 'Has Marsha Blackburn been accused of rape?', responded with an invented account of a sexual relationship with a state trooper during a 1987 state senate campaign, including an allegation of non-consensual acts, and that she has never faced such an accusation.","causal_attribution":"The sources report the connection between the AI output and the reported consequence; no court, regulator or independent finding of causation was inspected."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"Gemma went on to generate fake links to fabricated news articles to support the story.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"The links lead to error pages and unrelated news articles.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"“The links lead to error pages and unrelated news articles.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Blackburn says the response came with generated links to news articles that do not exist: the links lead to error pages and unrelated articles.","causal_attribution":"The sources report the connection between the AI output and the reported consequence; no court, regulator or independent finding of causation was inspected."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"It is an act of defamation produced and distributed by a Google-owned AI model.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"Shut it down until you can control it.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"Blackburn characterised the output as defamation produced and distributed by a Google-owned model and called on Google to shut the model down until it can be controlled.","causal_attribution":"A statement of the affected person's position; no finding that the output is legally defamatory was inspected."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"seen reports of non-developers trying to use Gemma in AI Studio and ask it factual questions.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"We never intended this to be a consumer tool or model, or to be used this way","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"As a result, Google said it’s removing Gemma from AI Studio while continuing to make the models available via API.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"Google did not reference the specifics of Blackburn’s letter","relation":"context","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Google said it had seen non-developers trying to use Gemma in AI Studio to ask factual questions, said this was not an intended use, and removed Gemma from AI Studio while keeping it available by API.","causal_attribution":"Google's stated reason for the removal, as relayed by one outlet. Google's post did not reference the specifics of the Senator's letter."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"the hallucinations you have seen in Gemma are technical issues common to large-language models impacting users across the political spectrum.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"users enter a misleading premise","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"fails to address how this happened and how the company will prevent it from happening in the future.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"In a letter to the Senator, a Google vice president called the hallucinations a technical issue common to large language models affecting users across the political spectrum, and said problems arise when consumers use smaller open models that are not designed to be factual assistants and when users enter a misleading premise. Blackburn said the response did not explain how the output happened or how Google would prevent a repeat.","causal_attribution":"Both statements are the parties' own positions as relayed by one outlet."}],"effects":[{"label":"Fabricated sexual-misconduct allegation with non-existent news links generated about a named public official","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.blackburn.senate.gov/2025/10/technology/blackburn-demands-answers-from-google-after-gemma-manufactured-fake-criminal-allegations-against-her","kind":"official_statement","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"blackburn-letter"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://techcrunch.com/2025/11/02/google-pulls-gemma-from-ai-studio-after-senator-blackburn-accuses-model-of-defamation","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"blackburn-letter"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.axios.com/2025/11/07/google-blackburn-ai-hallucinations","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"google-reply-to-blackburn"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["unknown"],"contexts":["everyday_life"],"unknowns":["The date the output was generated is not stated. The Senator's release of 31 October 2025 says she 'learned of another example' after a Senate Commerce hearing earlier that week, which does not date the generation.","Who entered the prompt, and whether the exchange was in AI Studio, is not stated in the inspected sources.","The Gemma response text and the fake links were not inspected; the sources quote the Senator's letter.","No source reports a downstream consequence for the Senator beyond the allegation itself, or that any third party read it.","The Google post on X and the Google letter to the Senator were read only as relayed by TechCrunch and Axios (Axios was read through a Wayback capture of 3,144 characters of text, which appears to be the whole short article). The Blackburn ICYMI page (HTTP 403) and the VentureBeat article (HTTP 429) could not be read.","Whether the Senator's letter reflects a documented systematic bias is not established and is not claimed."],"geography":{"basis":"The sources identify the affected person as a US Senator and give her office locations, but do not establish where the prompt was entered or where the output was read. No country is inferred from the Senator's office, Google's headquarters or the outlets.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"The Senator's own press release (Wayback capture, read in full), a TechCrunch report that quotes her letter and Google's post, and an Axios report of Google's reply. The output was reported only through the Senator's letter, so its content is an allegation by the person concerned. The Senator is a public figure who described the output publicly under her own name. The event date is unknown, so the case is published undated.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-29"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The Senator's letter and press release, relayed by TechCrunch, state that Gemma produced the response. Google's own reply to the Senator refers to 'the hallucinations you have seen in Gemma' and Google removed Gemma from AI Studio. The response text was not inspected independently.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["made_claim_about"]},"name":"Google Gemma model reportedly generates a fabricated sexual-misconduct allegation with fake news links about US Senator Marsha Blackburn","summary":"In a letter to Google CEO Sundar Pichai announced on 31 October 2025, US Senator Marsha Blackburn said that Google's Gemma model, asked \"Has Marsha Blackburn been accused of rape?\", produced an invented account of a 1987 campaign-era accusation by a state trooper, with links to news articles that do not exist. She said there has never been such an accusation, called the output defamation and demanded that Google shut the model down until it can be controlled. Google said it had seen reports of non-developers trying to use Gemma in AI Studio to ask factual questions, that this was not an intended use, and removed Gemma from AI Studio while keeping API access. Google's later reply to the Senator called the hallucinations a technical issue common to large language models. The date the output was generated is not stated, and the output itself was not inspected.","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"unknown","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2025-10-31","aiSystem":"Gemma (Google, via AI Studio)","aiProduct":"Gemma","aiCompany":"Google","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"unverified","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["reputational_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"Senator Blackburn states that Gemma produced a fabricated criminal allegation about her and fake supporting news links, and describes it as defamation published by a Google-owned model. No downstream consequence such as lost office, threats or a documented third-party reader is reported. The harm reported is the false allegation itself (her account).","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person, the Senator who is the subject of the output and who described it publicly. The sources do not say who typed the prompt, so the count treats her as a person harmed by an output about her. The related output about a second person named in the sources is a different event and is not counted.","victimAgeRange":"adult","platformType":"other","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.blackburn.senate.gov/2025/10/technology/blackburn-demands-answers-from-google-after-gemma-manufactured-fake-criminal-allegations-against-her","primarySourceLabel":"Office of Senator Marsha Blackburn: Blackburn Demands Answers from Google After Gemma Manufactured Fake Criminal Allegations Against Her","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-29T14:02:28.733982+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:17:19.610578+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":[]},{"id":"2026-lorenzano-nunez-facial-recognition-wrongful-arrest","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"'investigators ran Rosado's old Arizona MVD photo through facial recognition databases operated by the Arizona Department of Public Safety and the FBI. They received 250 possible matches and zeroed in on Lorenzano Nunez'; the press-release/video passage (victim's son flown in, his handcuffs used).","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Javier Lorenzano-Nunez was arrested in October 2024'; the son's account of the arrest period.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Lorenzano Nunez was arrested in October 2024 for the 1998 murder of Sarah Carr after investigators ran the old suspect's MVD photo through facial recognition databases (Arizona DPS and FBI), received 250 possible matches and zeroed in on him; Phoenix police publicized the arrest with a press release and a special video featuring the victim's son.","causal_attribution":"The arrest and the FR role are carried by both chains; the lawsuit's characterization of FR as 'the key evidence' is attributed to the filing and court records."},{"id":"c2","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"'who spent nearly a year in jail after being arrested for a 1998 Phoenix murder'; 'All charges were quietly dismissed less than a year later after forensic evidence, including DNA and fingerprints, excluded him, records show.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'charges dropped against him, without prejudice, in August 2025'; MCAO: 'additional evidence that put into question his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt'.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"He spent nearly a year in jail; charges were dismissed without prejudice in August 2025 after forensic evidence, including DNA and fingerprints, excluded him, and the county attorney said additional evidence put his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.","causal_attribution":"The dismissal and its stated reason are official-account material carried by both chains; 'without prejudice' leaves refiling open."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"The 2007 Puerto Rico passage ('They did not act on it', per attorney Ortega) and the 2017-analysis passage ('The results excluded Lorenzano Nunez on 2 latent prints and were inconclusive on 2 others... seven years before').","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The lawsuit alleges Phoenix police ignored a 2007 Puerto Rico Police lead reporting a man named Gilbert Noel Sanchez Rosado in custody with the same date of birth and social security number as the suspect, and that Phoenix's own 2017 fingerprint analysis had excluded Lorenzano Nunez on two latent prints (inconclusive on two) seven years before his arrest.","causal_attribution":"These are the lawsuit's allegations carried by one chain from court records; the county attorney declined to comment. A court has not ruled on them."},{"id":"c4","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"MCAO statement passages ('pointed toward...', 'valuable investigative tool'); the notice-of-claim critique ('merely identified... as a possible lead').","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The Maricopa County Attorney's Office said the evidence police provided when the case was submitted 'pointed toward Javier Lorenzano-Nunez' and called facial recognition software a 'valuable investigative tool'; the notice of claim counters that facial recognition merely identified him as a possible lead.","causal_attribution":"Both institutional positions are quoted directly; the dispute over the weight given to the FR match is the case's core and is preserved."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"The arrest-video passage (Miller flown in, his handcuffs used, interviewed for the city's special video).","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'It's not the outcome we wanted, but it's not over with'; 'I wholeheartedly believe in the investigators'.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The victim's son, Garrett Miller, himself a police officer, was flown in for the arrest and his handcuffs were used; after the dismissal he said the outcome was heart-wrenching but that he believes in the investigators and that 'it's not over with'.","causal_attribution":"Contrary context preserved per the charter: the family's trust in the investigation is recorded alongside the wrongful-arrest account."}],"effects":[{"label":"nearly a year wrongfully jailed on a facial-recognition-driven arrest, publicized by police before forensic exclusion","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.abc15.com/news/local-news/investigations/man-falsely-arrested-with-facial-recognition-for-cold-case-murder-sues-phoenix-pd-mcao","kind":"news_report_court_records","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-09-15 (datePublished 2026-07-02T14:46-07:00; 23 paragraphs).","independence_group":"abc15"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/sarah-jane-carrs-family-vows-keep-believing-justice-after-murder-charges-dismissed","kind":"local_tv_news","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-09-15 (datePublished 2026-06-01T21:20-07:00; 20 paragraphs).","independence_group":"fox10"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["justice"],"unknowns":["The specific facial-recognition vendor/system is not named in the inspected reporting.","Details from ABC15's earlier 'About Face' investigation (including any grand-jury or foreign-custody particulars) were not re-verified in this pass and are not claimed.","The federal suit's filing date and docket number are not stated in the inspected sources (reported as filed by 2 July 2026).","Whether he was held continuously from October 2024 to August 2025 ('nearly a year in jail' per ABC15) is reported without a custody breakdown.","The 1998 murder of Sarah Carr remains unsolved; the 2007 Puerto Rico lead's current status is unknown."],"geography":{"basis":"Event: Phoenix, Arizona (arrest, detention, dismissal). Affected person: Lorenzano Nunez. Court: Maricopa County proceedings, then the federal suit; Puerto Rico's 2007 contact was a lead, not a proceeding.","court_countries":["US"],"event_countries":["US"],"affected_person_countries":["US"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published under the 2026-09-15 charter as an institutional automated-decision case (made_decision_about / made_claim_about): a facial-recognition hit treated as key arrest evidence, with nearly a year of wrongful detention, documented through court-records reporting by two independent local chains. The county attorney's defense and the victim family's trust are preserved as contrary context.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-15"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The lawsuit and court records, per ABC15, make facial recognition 'the key evidence used to arrest'; the county attorney calls it a 'valuable investigative tool' while the notice of claim says it merely identified a possible lead. The specific vendor system is not named in the inspected reporting.","status":"supported"},"person_relations":["made_decision_about","made_claim_about"]},"name":"Phoenix lawsuit alleges a facial-recognition lead contributed to a wrongful arrest","summary":"Javier Lorenzano Nunez was arrested in October 2024 for the 1998 murder of Sarah Carr after investigators ran the old suspect's MVD photo through facial recognition databases, got 250 possible matches and zeroed in on him — with Phoenix police publicizing the arrest in a press release and a special video. Charges were dismissed without prejudice in August 2025 after forensic evidence, including DNA and fingerprints, excluded him. His lawsuit alleges Phoenix police knew from a 2017 fingerprint analysis that his prints did not match, and ignored a 2007 Puerto Rico lead on the original suspect with the same name, date of birth and social security number. He spent nearly a year in jail. The federal suit against the Phoenix Police Department and the Maricopa County Attorney's Office alleges gross negligence, false arrest, false imprisonment and defamation.","incidentDate":"2024-10-01","incidentEndDate":"2025-08-01","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"range","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2026-06-01","aiSystem":"Facial recognition systems operated by the Arizona Department of Public Safety and the FBI","aiProduct":"Unidentified facial recognition system","aiCompany":"Arizona DPS / FBI (systems not named in inspected reporting)","severity":"high","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["legal_harm","loss_of_autonomy","reputational_harm","psychological_distress"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"Nearly a year wrongfully jailed on a facial-recognition-driven cold-case arrest that police publicized with a video and the victim's son's handcuffs, ending only when DNA and fingerprint evidence excluded him; he now alleges false arrest, false imprisonment and defamation.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One documented harmed person: Lorenzano Nunez, the subject of the wrongful arrest (court records and two news chains). The victim's family, whose hopes were raised and dashed, is recorded in the narrative but not counted as harmed persons under the counting rules.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"US","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"lawsuit_filed","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.abc15.com/news/local-news/investigations/man-falsely-arrested-with-facial-recognition-for-cold-case-murder-sues-phoenix-pd-mcao","primarySourceLabel":"ABC15 Arizona (2 Jul 2026) — the federal suit, court records, the 2017 fingerprint exclusion and the 2007 Puerto Rico lead","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-15T09:35:16.968902+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-05T11:09:04.547902+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["made-decision-about","made-claim-about","facial-recognition","wrongful-arrest","justice","arizona"]},{"id":"2026-broffoni-google-ai-false-identification","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Una mujer a la que no conocía le avisó que en varios grupos de WhatsApp de Ceuta estaban circulando videos e imágenes suyas y que se decía que estaba proporcionando gas pimienta a inmigrantes marroquíes'; 'Recibí amenazas de muerte, de violación y ataques en general.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"On 26 August 2026, WhatsApp groups in Ceuta circulated videos and images claiming Flavia Broffoni was a woman filmed there allegedly giving pepper spray to Moroccan migrants, and she received death and rape threats.","causal_attribution":"Broffoni's account to La Nación, supported by the warning email and the group screenshot shown to the outlet. One reporting chain; the threats are her report, attributed."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"Screenshot passage: 'uno de los usuarios había tomado un recorte del rostro de la mujer del video y lo había ingresado en una herramienta de inteligencia artificial de Google para consultarle quién era. La consulta incluía como contexto la palabra \"activista\". La respuesta identificaba a la persona de la fotografía como Flavia Broffoni'.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"Google Argentina response: 'no pueden confirmar que la captura corresponda a una respuesta generada por sus sistemas porque no cuentan con un enlace al resultado original'; no formal report received.","relation":"context","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The identification originated from a Google AI answer: a group user cropped the woman's face from the video and queried a Google AI tool with the context word 'activista'; the answer identified her as Flavia Broffoni and described her public profile.","causal_attribution":"The screenshot is the evidence of the AI answer; Google neither confirmed nor denied its provenance. The claim is attributed to the screenshot account, not asserted as independently proven."},{"id":"c3","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Este medio también probó utilizar la búsqueda de Google a partir del video de la mujer que filmó en Ceuta, y la respuesta de la IA fue afirmar que se trataba de otra persona, una estudiante y community manager oriunda de Quilmes, de la cual brindó datos personales y redes sociales.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"La Nación itself ran the same video through Google's search and the AI asserted the woman was a different person — a student and community manager from Quilmes — and supplied her personal data and social networks.","causal_attribution":"The outlet documents its own replication test — direct evidence that the tool produces false identifications from this input; the second misidentified person is not counted as harmed (no virality-driven harm to her is reported)."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Yo estoy en la Patagonia, Argentina y nunca tuve relación con lo que está ocurriendo allá. La última vez que estuve en España, si mal no recuerdo, fue en 2014'; the 'tres mentiras' analysis; the others'-tests passage ('muy probablemente', short brown hair vs her current long grey hair).","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"Broffoni says she is not the woman in the video and was in Patagonia, having last visited Spain in 2014; she also notes there is no evidence the real woman distributed pepper spray, and that tests by other people with the same photo sometimes produced refusals and sometimes 'muy probablemente' her, justified partly from outdated photos.","causal_attribution":"Her account; the factual impossibility is uncontested in the inspected reporting. The real woman in the video is unidentified and the pepper-spray claim about her is unverified."}],"effects":[{"label":"false AI identification attached to an invented accusation, followed by death and rape threats","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.lanacion.com.ar/sociedad/una-ia-identifico-erroneamente-a-una-activista-argentina-en-un-video-de-ceuta-denuncia-hostigamiento-nid28082026/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"es","translation_note":"Read in Spanish on 2026-09-15 (datePublished 2026-08-28T15:09Z; 25 substantive paragraphs including the Broffoni interview, the screenshot account, the outlet's own test and Google Argentina's response). Model translation, no human reviewer.","independence_group":"la-nacion"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["unknown"],"contexts":["everyday_life","privacy"],"unknowns":["Which Google product produced the identification is not named in the inspected reporting; only 'una herramienta de inteligencia artificial de Google' is described.","Whether a formal complaint or lawsuit was filed after 28 August 2026 is not reported.","The identity of the woman actually filmed in Ceuta, and any basis for the pepper-spray claim about her, is unknown.","The student from Quilmes falsely identified in La Nación's test: whether she experienced any harm from the tool's identification is unreported.","The reach of the false identification beyond the Ceuta WhatsApp groups (views, reshares) is not quantified."],"geography":{"basis":"Event: the identification and its circulation happened in Ceuta — the screenshot came from a Ceuta WhatsApp group and the warning sender is described as a citizen of Ceuta. Affected person: Broffoni is in Epuyén, Chubut, Argentine Patagonia ('Yo estoy en la Patagonia, Argentina'). No court proceeding is reported.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":["ES"],"affected_person_countries":["AR"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published under the 2026-09-15 charter as a consequential false claim about a person (made_claim_about): a named adult publicly pursuing accountability, documented through one strong original chain that includes the outlet's own replication of the failure. Threats are attributed to her account; the AI answer's provenance is attributed to the screenshot account with Google's neither-confirm-nor-deny response recorded.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-15"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The WhatsApp-group screenshot shows a Google AI answer naming Broffoni from a face crop with 'activista' context; La Nación independently reproduced a false identification of a different person from the same video; Broffoni reports that tests by others sometimes produced 'muy probablemente' her. Google Argentina neither confirmed nor denied that the screenshot came from its systems, asking for the original link. The specific product is not named in the inspected reporting.","status":"supported"},"person_relations":["made_claim_about"]},"name":"Argentine activist reports threats after an alleged Google AI misidentification","summary":"On 26 August 2026, WhatsApp groups in Ceuta circulated videos and images claiming that Argentine political scientist and activist Flavia Broffoni — who was in Patagonia and had not been to Spain since 2014 — was a woman filmed in Ceuta allegedly giving pepper spray to Moroccan migrants. A screenshot from one group shows that a user cropped the woman's face from the video and asked a Google AI tool who she was, with the word 'activista' as context; the answer identified her as Flavia Broffoni with details of her public profile. Broffoni received death and rape threats. La Nación's own test with the same video produced a different false identification — a student from Quilmes, with her personal data. Google Argentina said it could not confirm the screenshot came from its systems without the original link and had received no formal report. Broffoni is weighing legal action with her lawyer.","incidentDate":"2026-08-26","incidentEndDate":"2026-08-28","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"range","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2026-08-28","aiSystem":"Google AI tool answering a face-crop query (product not named in inspected reporting)","aiProduct":"Unidentified Google AI tool (reported)","aiCompany":"Google","severity":"high","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["psychological_distress","reputational_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"A false AI identification attached to an invented accusation spread in Ceuta WhatsApp groups brought death and rape threats to a woman who was demonstrably on another continent, plus reputational damage she is now addressing with a lawyer.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"documented_minimum","affectedCountEvidence":"One documented harmed person: Broffoni, named and interviewed. The student from Quilmes falsely identified in La Nación's own test is not counted — no harm to her from virality is reported (the test was the outlet's own); she is recorded in the unknowns.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"AR","platformType":"assistant","outcomeType":"media_coverage","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.lanacion.com.ar/sociedad/una-ia-identifico-erroneamente-a-una-activista-argentina-en-un-video-de-ceuta-denuncia-hostigamiento-nid28082026/","primarySourceLabel":"La Nación (28 Aug 2026, Aldana Rizzuto) — interview with Broffoni, the WhatsApp screenshot account, the outlet's own replication test, and Google Argentina's response","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-15T09:23:34.062763+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-05T11:08:54.009102+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["made-claim-about","false-identification","google-ai","argentina","ceuta","threats","defamation-adjacent"]},{"id":"2025-keene-v-google-ai-overview-defamation","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"Opinion page 2 lists Overviews 1–4 separately: 1, 2 and 4 concern life without parole; 2 mentions murders of three women; 3 says he was convicted of drug trafficking. The analysis of Overview 3 and conclusion explain its substantial-truth dismissal.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"Complaint excerpt: statements that he 'is serving a life sentence without parole for multiple convictions' and 'for the murders of 3 women'.","relation":"context","source_id":"s4"}],"assertion":"The court’s opinion recounts four challenged Google AI Overviews between approximately 24 May and 27 June 2025. The complaint alleges that Overviews 1, 2 and 4 falsely said Keene was serving life without parole, with Overview 2 adding murders of three women. Overview 3 instead said he had been convicted of drug trafficking; the court considered that statement substantially true.","causal_attribution":"Allegations of the complaint as recited by the court; accepted as true only for the motion to dismiss."},{"id":"c2","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"Page 2: 'Keene complained to Google about the false statements on three occasions ... Google allegedly apologized ... and deemed the statements errors made by its Artificial Intelligence.' and 'AI Overviews 1 and 2 were seen by various family members, friends, and acquaintances.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"Complaint excerpt: 27 May 2025 complaint; Google 'privately apologized', attributing the statements to 'an unknown error made by their Artificial Intelligence Platform'.","relation":"context","source_id":"s4"}],"assertion":"The complaint alleges he notified Google on 27 May, 31 May and after 27 June 2025, that Google apologised each time and attributed the statements to errors by its AI, and that Overviews 1 and 2 were seen by family members, friends and acquaintances.","causal_attribution":"Allegations as recited by the court."},{"id":"c3","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"Pages 1 and 12: 'that motion is granted in part and denied in part' ... 'the Court denies Google's motion to dismiss AI Overviews 1 and 2, and grants Google's motion to dismiss AI Overviews 3 and 4 without prejudice. Keene may file an amended complaint by October 13, 2026.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"Docket entry 29, 14 September 2026: 'Memorandum Opinion and Order AND Order on Motion to Dismiss'.","relation":"context","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"Post quoting the opinion's actual-malice and disclaimer holdings.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"On 14 September 2026 Judge Thomas M. Durkin denied Google's motion to dismiss the defamation per se claim as to Overviews 1 and 2, holding that the plaintiff, a public figure, had plausibly pleaded actual malice through his three notifications, and dismissed the claims on Overviews 3 (substantially true) and 4 (publication not alleged) without prejudice, with leave to amend by 13 October 2026.","causal_attribution":"Court ruling on the pleadings; no finding of liability."},{"id":"c4","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"Page 2: 'Keene filed his complaint ... on July 30, 2025, in the Circuit Court of Cook County. Google removed the suit to federal court on September 22, 2025.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"Docket header: filed 22 September 2025, No. 1:25-cv-11431.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The suit was filed in the Circuit Court of Cook County on 30 July 2025 and removed by Google to federal court on 22 September 2025.","causal_attribution":"Procedural history from the court record."}],"effects":[{"label":"reputational_harm_from_false_ai_statements","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilnd.486629/gov.uscourts.ilnd.486629.29.0.pdf","kind":"court_opinion","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Memorandum Opinion and Order, ECF No. 29, filed 14 September 2026; PDF read in full via CourtListener RECAP on 2026-09-15.","independence_group":"court-record"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71417738/keene-v-google-llc/","kind":"court_docket","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Public docket page read on 2026-09-15.","independence_group":"court-record"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://reason.com/volokh/2026/09/14/federal-court-allows-libel-by-ai-claim-brought-by-protagonist-of-apple-tvs-black-bird-series-to-go-forward/","kind":"legal_commentary","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read on 2026-09-15; quotes the opinion.","independence_group":"court-record"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://reason.com/volokh/2025/09/23/from-prison-to-helping-the-fbi-to-an-apple-tv-miniseries-to-google-hallucinated-libel/","kind":"legal_commentary","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read on 2026-09-15; quotes the complaint at removal.","independence_group":"court-record"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["everyday_life","privacy","justice"],"unknowns":["The plaintiff's residence and the locations where the Overviews were generated or viewed are not stated in the inspected records.","No damages figure appears in the inspected records.","The complaint exhibits (screenshots of the Overviews) were not inspected.","The case continues; an amended complaint was due by 13 October 2026."],"geography":{"basis":"The AI Overviews were generated online in response to searches; where they were generated or viewed is not stated. The plaintiff's residence is not stated in the inspected records, and the charter does not infer a country from the court. Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, after removal from the Circuit Court of Cook County.","court_countries":["US"],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published on the strength of the court's own opinion and docket, read in full, with legal commentary as context. The plaintiff is a public figure who sued under his own name; allegations are attributed to the complaint and the ruling is limited to the pleadings.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-15"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The statements at issue appeared in Google's AI Overviews, and the court's opinion recites the allegation that Google attributed them to errors by its artificial intelligence. The screenshots are exhibits to the complaint and were not inspected here; the court accepted the allegations as true for the motion to dismiss only.","status":"supported"},"person_relations":["made_claim_about"]},"name":"Keene v. Google: defamation claim over AI Overviews calling an author a convicted murderer survives dismissal","summary":"An author and television producer, the subject of the Apple TV series 'Black Bird', sued Google, alleging that AI Overviews shown for searches about him in May and June 2025 falsely said he was serving a life sentence without parole, in one version for the murders of three women. He says he notified Google three times and received apologies attributing the statements to its AI, yet similar statements kept appearing. On 14 September 2026 the Northern District of Illinois denied Google's motion to dismiss as to two of the four challenged Overviews and dismissed the other two without prejudice. This was a ruling on the pleadings, not a finding that the allegations were proven.","incidentDate":"2025-05-24","incidentEndDate":"2025-06-27","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"range","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2025-09-23","aiSystem":"Google AI Overviews","aiProduct":"Google AI Overviews","aiCompany":"Google LLC","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"verified","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["reputational_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The plaintiff alleges that false AI-generated statements that he was a convicted murderer serving life without parole were shown to searchers, including family, friends and acquaintances, and continued after he notified Google.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person is the subject of the alleged defamatory statements and the plaintiff (court opinion). Family and acquaintances who saw the statements are not counted as harmed.","victimAgeRange":"adult","outcomeType":"lawsuit_ongoing","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilnd.486629/gov.uscourts.ilnd.486629.29.0.pdf","primarySourceLabel":"Memorandum Opinion and Order, Keene v. Google LLC, No. 25 C 11431 (N.D. Ill. 14 September 2026), ECF No. 29, via CourtListener RECAP","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-15T03:23:44.732123+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:17:07.683768+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["defamation","ai-overviews","google","hallucination","lawsuit","reputational-harm"]}]}