{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-10-23T16:31:43.847Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"defamation","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"","evidence":"","year":"2024","response":"","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":3,"coverage":{"cases":3,"countries":1,"languages":2,"unknownLocation":2,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":0,"lawsuits":1,"regulatory":0,"minors":0,"coreRelations":1,"contextualRelations":2,"mixedRelations":0,"unknownRelations":0,"relationPending":0,"relationUnknown":0},"countingNote":"Distinct public cases in this selection. People counts apply within individual cases only; cross-case person overlap has not been resolved. No population incidence estimate.","affectedCountNote":"Interpret person counts with affectedCountStatus and the reported effects. Unquantified zeros are placeholders, not a measured zero.","source":"AI incidents","publisher":"NOPE","url":"https://nope.net/incidents","license":"CC BY 4.0"},"incidents":[{"id":"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-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-china-wang-ai-faceswap-defamation","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'2024年4月至2025年1月间，王某甲利用AI软件的深度合成技术，将于某（系化名）等多人的人脸信息与色情图片进行拼接，伪造大量不雅图片'; '多次在境外网站以公开发帖的形式予以散布。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"Between April 2024 and January 2025 Wang used the deep-synthesis technology of AI software to splice the facial information of Yu (pseudonym) and several other people onto pornographic images, forged a large number of indecent images, fabricated 'sexual' topics about them and spread them repeatedly in public posts on overseas websites.","causal_attribution":"The court's account of the facts as published by the Jiangsu High People's Court and relayed by The Paper."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'2025年1月5日，王某甲又将两张AI换脸后面部为于某的裸照和于某有关证件图片发送给王某乙（另案处理），并捏造自己与于某存在性交易的不实信息。'; '后王某乙将上述图片转发至微信群，并在群里声称于某与他人存在性交易，引发群内外大量人员讨论，给于某的个人形象、工作、生活带来不利影响'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"On 5 January 2025 he sent two AI face-swapped nude images bearing Yu's face and images of Yu's identity documents to a second man with a fabricated claim that he had had a sex-for-money transaction with Yu; the second man forwarded them to Yu's work WeChat group and claimed there that Yu engaged in sex-for-money transactions with others, which the court found caused extensive discussion and adverse effects on Yu's image, work and life, seriously lowering Yu's social evaluation and violating Yu's dignity.","causal_attribution":"Court findings relayed by The Paper."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'张家港市人民法院于2025年12月1日作出一审判决，以诽谤罪判处被告人王某甲有期徒刑一年三个月。'; '宣判后，王某甲提出上诉。苏州市中级人民法院依法作出二审裁定，驳回上诉，维持原判。'; '1月27日，江苏省高级人民法院公布2025年度十大典型案例'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The Zhangjiagang People's Court convicted him of defamation on 1 December 2025 and sentenced him to one year and three months' imprisonment, treating his voluntary surrender as mitigation; the Suzhou Intermediate People's Court rejected his appeal; on 27 January 2026 the Jiangsu High People's Court listed the case among its ten typical cases of 2025.","causal_attribution":"Court decisions as published by the High Court and relayed by The Paper; the written judgments were not inspected."}],"effects":[{"label":"the face of a person (pseudonym Yu) AI-swapped onto pornographic images posted on overseas sites and forwarded to Yu's work WeChat group with a fabricated claim of sex-for-money transactions; the court found harm to Yu's image, work, life and dignity","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"http://thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_32473843","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"zh","translation_note":"Read live in Chinese on 2026-09-23 (The Paper, 邱海鸿, 27 January 2026 19:07); relays the Jiangsu High People's Court's 2025 top-ten typical cases publication. The court judgment itself was not inspected. Model reading; no human bilingual review.","independence_group":"jiangsu-high-court"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["work","everyday_life","justice"],"unknowns":["The AI software used and the overseas websites.","How many other people's faces were used besides Yu.","The outcome of the separate case against the man who forwarded the images.","Whether Yu obtained civil compensation.","The judgment texts were not inspected; Chinese read by the model without human bilingual review.","Yu's sex and age are not stated in the cited body (于某, 其); earlier uncited reporting described a woman; victim_age_range adult is inferred from the work WeChat group.","Where the events took place and where Yu and the defendant live; the body names only the courts.","The conduct period is stated as ending in January 2025; 5 January 2025 is the last dated act and is used as the end date."],"geography":{"basis":"The Paper's account of the court's findings states no event location or residence for Yu or the defendant; the posts were made on overseas websites and the forwarding was to a WeChat work group. Under the charter a country is not inferred from the court, so event and affected-person countries are left empty as a reviewed unknown. Court: Zhangjiagang Municipal People's Court and Suzhou Intermediate People's Court, Jiangsu, China.","court_countries":["CN"],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Restored under the 2026-09-15 charter as a harmful-artifact case with a criminal conviction: AI face-swapped pornographic images of a person forwarded to their workplace, with court findings of harm to their image, work, life and dignity, as published by the Jiangsu High People's Court and relayed by The Paper (one chain; all claims reported). The original ID and first-publication timestamp are preserved; the sentence and dates correct the historical row; the victim's sex, previously asserted, is not in the cited body and is recorded as unknown. The victim is identified only by a court pseudonym.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-23"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The court found that the defendant used the deep-synthesis technology of AI software to splice the victims' faces onto pornographic images (The Paper relaying the Jiangsu High People's Court). The software is not identified.","status":"supported"},"person_relations":["depicted_or_impersonated"]},"name":"Jiangsu, China (Zhangjiagang court): a man used AI face-swap deep-synthesis to splice the faces of a person referred to as Yu and several others onto pornographic images, fabricated 'sexual' stories about them and posted the material repeatedly on overseas websites between April 2024 and January 2025; after two face-swapped nude images of Yu and Yu's ID were forwarded to Yu's work WeChat group with a fabricated claim of sex-for-money transactions, he was convicted of criminal defamation and sentenced to one year and three months (1 December 2025), upheld on appeal and listed by the Jiangsu High People's Court among its 2025 typical cases","summary":"According to the Jiangsu High People's Court's 2025 top-ten typical cases, published on 27 January 2026 and reported by The Paper, a man surnamed Wang used the deep-synthesis technology of AI software between April 2024 and January 2025 to splice the facial information of a person (pseudonym Yu) and several other people onto pornographic images, fabricated a large number of indecent images and 'sexual' topics about them, and repeatedly spread them in public posts on overseas websites. On 5 January 2025 he sent two AI face-swapped nude images bearing Yu's face and images of Yu's identity documents to a second man (dealt with separately) and fabricated the claim that he had had a sex-for-money transaction with Yu; although the second man said he would forward the material to Yu's work WeChat group, Wang did not clarify that it was false or effectively stop him, only deleting the contact. The second man forwarded the images to the WeChat group and claimed there that Yu sold sex, prompting extensive discussion inside and outside the group and, the court found, adverse effects on Yu's personal image, work and life, a serious lowering of Yu's social evaluation and a violation of Yu's dignity. The Zhangjiagang People's Court held that using deep-synthesis technology that ordinary people cannot easily identify to generate indecent images and fabricate sexual topics, spread repeatedly through information networks, was defamation of serious circumstances that seriously harmed social order; taking into account his voluntary surrender, it sentenced him on 1 December 2025 to one year and three months' imprisonment for defamation. The Suzhou Intermediate People's Court rejected his appeal. The High Court described the case as a typical example of punishing online defamation committed with AI.","incidentDate":"2024-04-01","incidentEndDate":"2025-01-05","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"range","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2026-01-27","aiSystem":"AI deep-synthesis ('face-swap') software; not identified in the court's account","aiProduct":"Unidentified image tool","severity":"high","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["exploitation_or_abuse","reputational_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The face of a person (pseudonym Yu) was AI-swapped onto pornographic images that were posted repeatedly on overseas websites and then forwarded to Yu's workplace WeChat group with a fabricated claim that she sold sex; the court found adverse effects on Yu's image, work and life, a serious lowering of Yu's social evaluation and a violation of Yu's personal dignity. The court's findings are relayed by The Paper; the judgment itself was not inspected.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"established","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"partial","affectedCountEvidence":"One identified victim (Yu, pseudonym) whose images reached her work group; the court states that several other people's faces were also used (于某等多人) without a number. Partial: 1 counted plus unquantified others.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"CN","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"criminal_charges","outcomeStatus":"resolved","primarySourceUrl":"http://thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_32473843","primarySourceLabel":"The Paper (澎湃新闻), 27 January 2026: 利用AI换脸生成不雅照片诽谤他人，男子被判一年三个月","firstPublishedAt":"2026-06-15T06:50:02.798485+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:17:31.844756+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["criminal","deepfake","face-swap","defamation","china","jiangsu","non-consensual-images","conviction","workplace","depicted-or-impersonated"]}]}