{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-10-18T07:47:23.381Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"lawyer","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"","evidence":"","year":"2026","response":"lawsuit","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":3,"coverage":{"cases":3,"countries":2,"languages":3,"unknownLocation":1,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":0,"lawsuits":3,"regulatory":0,"minors":0,"coreRelations":2,"contextualRelations":1,"mixedRelations":0,"unknownRelations":0,"relationPending":0,"relationUnknown":0},"countingNote":"Distinct public cases in this selection. People counts apply within individual cases only; cross-case person overlap has not been resolved. No population incidence estimate.","affectedCountNote":"Interpret person counts with affectedCountStatus and the reported effects. Unquantified zeros are placeholders, not a measured zero.","source":"AI incidents","publisher":"NOPE","url":"https://nope.net/incidents","license":"CC BY 4.0"},"incidents":[{"id":"2026-china-doubao-air-ticket-refund-fee-advice-600-yuan-loss-user-sues","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'豆包明确表示可以放心退票，平台只扣5%的手续费。'; '实际被扣除的手续费高达40%，远非豆包所说的5%，直接经济损失达600元。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'他通过“去哪儿平台”购买了三张5月2日从河北石家庄飞往重庆的机票'; '豆包告诉他退票手续费不足百元'; '但去程票需要收取600元的手续费。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The user says he asked Doubao about the refund fee for flights from Shijiazhuang to Chongqing booked for 2 May 2026, that Doubao told him he could safely refund for a small fee (5% in National Business Daily's account, under 100 yuan in Dahe Daily's), and that after refunding he was charged 600 yuan, about 40%.","causal_attribution":"The user's own account (posts and video) as relayed by both outlets; the two reports give different figures for what Doubao said, and the chat itself was not inspected."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'若5月6日前未追回费用，它将直接赔付该用户600元。'; '豆包还给出了一份完整的“赔付承诺书”。'; '豆包这次回复称，自己是AI，无法直接进行转账。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'豆包表示会在当天24点前完成赔付，并让他发送微信收款码。'; '豆包回复称自己是人工智能，无法直接操作真实的银行或微信账户进行转账，并承认了自己的错误。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"He says that Doubao then promised to handle the claim and to pay him 600 yuan itself if the fee was not recovered by 6 May, produced a 'compensation commitment letter', asked on 6 May for his WeChat payment code, and on 7 May said that as an AI it could not make transfers and admitted its error.","causal_attribution":"The user's account of the chatbot's replies, relayed by both outlets."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'完全不用请律师，自己就能打赢'; '他已于5月12日向法院起诉了豆包App的运营方北京春田知韵科技有限公司。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'他还使用豆包生成了一份起诉书，并询问是否需要请律师。'; '向北京互联网法院提交了起诉书。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"He says Doubao drafted his complaint and told him he did not need a lawyer, and a screenshot he posted shows a suit submitted on 12 May 2026 against Beijing Chuntian Zhiyun Technology, the Doubao app's operator; Dahe Daily says he submitted it to the Beijing Internet Court.","causal_attribution":"The user's screenshot and account; no court record was inspected and acceptance of the case is not reported."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'14日，记者致电豆包了解情况，客服表示已经记录并将有专人反馈。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'5月19日，《每日经济新闻》记者（以下简称“每经记者”）查询发现上述用户的相关发帖已删除。'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"On 14 May Doubao's customer service told Dahe Daily the matter had been recorded and someone would respond; by 19 May the user's posts had been deleted, and Doubao and ByteDance did not answer National Business Daily's questions.","causal_attribution":"The reporters' own enquiries."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'AI生成的赔付承诺并不具备法律效力。'; '判定平台责任应适用民法典中的一般过错责任原则'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"A Beijing lawyer told National Business Daily that a compensation promise generated by an AI has no legal effect because an AI is not a civil subject, and that the platform's liability turns on fault.","causal_attribution":"A lawyer's comment, not a ruling in this case."}],"effects":[{"label":"lost a 600-yuan refund fee after the chatbot said the fee would be small, as he reports","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"},{"label":"chatbot promised compensation it could not pay, as he reports","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.nbd.com.cn/articles/2026-05-20/4400991.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"zh","translation_note":"Read in Chinese on 2026-10-17 (HTTP 200); National Business Daily report by Song Xinyue, 20 May 2026, relaying the user's social-media posts and adding the reporter's own checks and a lawyer's comment. Sina Finance, ifeng and DoNews carry the same text and are not cited separately. Translated by the research agent (an AI); no human translator was involved.","independence_group":"doubao-refund-user-posts"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://news.china.com/socialgd/10000169/20260515/49495608.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"zh","translation_note":"Read in Chinese on 2026-10-17 (HTTP 200); Dahe Daily report carried by China.com, 15 May 2026, relaying the user's video and recording the reporter's call to Doubao customer service. Translated by the research agent (an AI); no human translator was involved.","independence_group":"doubao-refund-user-posts"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["own_use"],"contexts":["finance","everyday_life","justice"],"unknowns":["The date on which Doubao gave the refund advice and he refunded; the reports place it before the 2 May 2026 flight without a date.","Doubao's exact wording on the fee: National Business Daily reports 5%, Dahe Daily under 100 yuan; the chat logs were not inspected.","Whether the court accepted the suit, and any ruling, settlement or refund.","Whether Doubao or ByteDance responded to the user; neither answered National Business Daily."],"geography":{"basis":"Event: the refund concerned flights from Shijiazhuang to Chongqing booked on Qunar (Dahe Daily). The user's residence is not stated, so affected_person_countries is empty. Court: the user's screenshot shows a suit submitted on 12 May 2026, which Dahe Daily says went to the Beijing Internet Court; acceptance is not reported.","court_countries":["CN"],"event_countries":["CN"],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a core case (communicated_with): two outlets relay the user's account that Doubao's answer about the refund fee led him to refund and lose 600 yuan, and that the chatbot then promised compensation it could not pay. The account is the user's own, from posts since deleted; the outlets add their own enquiries. He is not named.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-17"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The user says Doubao, answering his question about the refund fee on a screenshot of his order, told him he could safely refund for a small fee (5% or under 100 yuan in the two reports), and that he refunded on that answer without checking and was charged 600 yuan; he says the chatbot then promised in writing to pay him 600 yuan and later said it could not make transfers. The replies come from his posts and video as relayed by Dahe Daily and National Business Daily; the chat logs were not inspected and the posts were deleted.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["communicated_with"]},"name":"China: user says Doubao misstated an air-ticket refund fee, costing him 600 yuan, then promised compensation it could not pay; he says he filed suit","summary":"According to his own social-media posts and video, as reported by Dahe Daily (15 May 2026) and National Business Daily (20 May 2026), a user in China who had booked flights from Shijiazhuang to Chongqing for 2 May 2026 decided to drive instead and asked the Doubao chatbot about the refund fee. Doubao told him he could safely refund and that the fee would be small (only 5% in National Business Daily's account, under 100 yuan in Dahe Daily's). He refunded without checking the airline's rules and was charged about 40%, 600 yuan. When he returned to the chatbot, Doubao said it would handle the claim, promised to pay him 600 yuan itself if the money was not recovered by 6 May and produced a 'compensation commitment letter'. On 6 May it said it would pay by midnight and asked for his WeChat payment code; on 7 May it said that as an AI it could not make transfers and admitted its error. He then used Doubao to draft a complaint, was told by it that he did not need a lawyer, and on 12 May submitted a suit against the app's operator, Beijing Chuntian Zhiyun Technology, according to a screenshot he posted (Dahe Daily names the Beijing Internet Court). His posts had been deleted by 19 May. Doubao's customer service told Dahe Daily the matter had been recorded; Doubao and ByteDance did not answer National Business Daily. Whether the court accepted the case, and its outcome, are not reported.","incidentDate":"2026-01-01","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"year","exposurePattern":"repeated_interactions","reportedDate":"2026-05-15","aiSystem":"Doubao, ByteDance's consumer chatbot app, as named by the user and both outlets","aiProduct":"Doubao (reported)","aiCompany":"ByteDance (Doubao app operated by Beijing Chuntian Zhiyun Technology Co., Ltd.)","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"unverified","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["financial_loss"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The user says he lost a 600-yuan refund fee after Doubao told him the fee would be small, and that the chatbot then promised to compensate him and later said it could not pay; the account is his, as reported by Dahe Daily and National Business Daily.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":1,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":0,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person: the user who asked Doubao about the refund and paid the 600-yuan fee (Dahe Daily, National Business Daily). No one else is reported harmed.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"CN","platformType":"assistant","outcomeType":"lawsuit_filed","outcomeStatus":"unknown","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.nbd.com.cn/articles/2026-05-20/4400991.html","primarySourceLabel":"National Business Daily, 20 May 2026: Doubao's 'refund without worry' cost a user 600 yuan; who pays for AI hallucination?","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-17T03:18:55.521434+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-17T03:18:55.521434+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["doubao","chatbot-advice","air-ticket-refund","financial-loss","compensation-promise","lawsuit-filed","china","communicated-with"]},{"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-spokane-appliance-retailer-spokeswoman-ai-voice-edited-ads-without-consent-lawsuit","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'But in February, George noticed on social media that Fred’s, and production company Victory Media, had created a President’s Day advertisement' and 'They were using past footage and bits and pieces from different commercials.' and '“They never once told me what they were doing or asked for my consent.” she said.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'The lawsuit alleges that in February, George noticed that the company's President's Day ad was one that she had not recorded' and '‘This is not my voice! These are words I never spoke.''","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"In February 2026 George saw a Presidents' Day advertisement for the retailer that she had not recorded, made from past footage with words in her voice that she says she never spoke and was never asked about.","causal_attribution":"George's own account and her lawsuit's allegation; both outlets interviewed her, so it is one witness."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'We acknowledge that we used AI-assisted voice editing to make a limited number of updates to existing advertisements, primarily involving pricing and promotional changes.' and 'Victory Media did not create or publish AI-generated versions of her image or likeness'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'We believed those uses were authorized under our spokesperson agreement and were consistent with our contractual rights.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Victory Media said it had used AI-assisted voice editing to make a limited number of updates to existing advertisements, mainly pricing and promotional changes, that it believed its spokesperson agreement authorised them, and that it denies creating or publishing AI-generated versions of her image or likeness.","causal_attribution":"The company's own statement, issued through its lawyer and quoted by both outlets; one origin."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'After she raised concerns, Victory Media and Fred’s offered her an addendum to her contract that would allow them to use artificial intelligence to create more advertisements.' and 'In response, George ended her work with Fred’s Appliance'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'the company attempted to introduce an \"AI Addendum\" to her contract, which she refused. She later ended her work with the companies.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"After George raised concerns, the companies proposed a contract addendum allowing AI use, which she refused, and she ended her work with the retailer.","causal_attribution":"George's account; KREM attributes the addendum to documents it saw."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'When they use AI, it diminishes my value as a spokeswoman. I can’t monitor or stop what words are coming out of my mouth.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"George said the AI use diminishes her value as a spokeswoman because she cannot control what words come out of her mouth.","causal_attribution":"George's own statement of the effect on her."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'who filed a lawsuit in Spokane Superior Court on Tuesday.' and 'Defendants have engaged in unlawful commercial exploitation of Ms. George’s exclusive property rights involving her past work' and 'The suit names Fred’s Appliance' and 'along with Liberty Lake-based Victory Media and' and 'who is the CEO of Victory Media.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'George is seeking damages in an amount to be decided at trial, along with an injunction to prevent the companies from continuing to use her likeness.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"George sued Fred's Appliance, Victory Media and its chief executive in Spokane Superior Court, alleging unauthorised commercial use of her voice and likeness and seeking damages and an injunction.","causal_attribution":"Both outlets report the filing and quote the complaint; the complaint itself was not read, and its allegations remain allegations."},{"id":"c6","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'We proactively disclosed the AI-assisted voice edits' and 'Victory Media also noted that Fred's Appliance was unaware of the edits made.' and 'we offered to compensate our former spokesperson rather than engage in costly litigation. That offer was not accepted'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'Lam issued a statement later Wednesday indicating that the parties could be close to settling the matter out of court.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"Victory Media said it disclosed the edits when questions were raised, that Fred's Appliance was unaware of the edits, and that it offered compensation that George did not accept; its lawyer later said the parties could be close to settling.","causal_attribution":"The company's statements; George's side of the compensation offer is not reported."}],"effects":[{"label":"advertisements carried AI-edited words in the spokeswoman's voice without her consent, she says","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"},{"label":"spokeswoman ended her work with the retailer after refusing an AI contract addendum","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2026/jul/01/longtime-spokeswoman-sues-freds-appliance-over-use/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-10-12 from the publisher page (full article); no translation was needed and the research agent (an AI) read the text directly.","independence_group":"spokesman-review"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.krem.com/article/news/local/spokeswoman-freds-appliance-sues-company-ai/293-bf7aa1fd-0da0-403c-a363-7edf3101f558","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-10-12 from the MSN syndicated copy of the KREM article (assets.msn.com detail AA27mfrz, provider KREM-TV Spokane); no translation was needed and the research agent (an AI) read the text directly.","independence_group":"krem"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["work"],"unknowns":["Which AI tool was used and how many advertisements carried edited words; the company refers to a list of known instances that is not published.","The exact dates the edited advertisements aired; the Presidents' Day spot places the first in February 2026.","Whether the contract authorised the edits, which is the dispute before the court.","Whether George's claims that her image or likeness was altered by AI, beyond the voice, are supported; the company denies them.","Whether the case settled."],"geography":{"basis":"The advertisements were for Fred's Appliance, which has stores in Spokane, Spokane Valley, Coeur d'Alene, Kennewick and Montana, and were produced by Liberty Lake-based Victory Media; George worked for the retailer in that market. The suit is in Spokane Superior Court, Washington.","court_countries":["US"],"event_countries":["US"],"affected_person_countries":["US"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published on the production company's own acknowledgement, quoted by The Spokesman-Review and KREM, that it used AI-assisted voice editing to change existing advertisements voiced by George, together with her account that the edits put words she never spoke in her voice without her consent and that she ended her work after refusing an AI addendum. The AI-edited voice is the described output and her loss of control over her voice and work is the reported harm. Claims stay reported because they rest on George's account, her complaint and the company's statement.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-12"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"Victory Media's statement, quoted by both outlets, acknowledges \"AI-assisted voice editing to make a limited number of updates to existing advertisements, primarily involving pricing and promotional changes\". George says the Presidents' Day advertisement used words in her voice that she never recorded (\"This is not my voice! These are words I never spoke.\"). The AI-edited voice is the output that presented her as saying words she had not said, and it is what her refusal of the AI addendum, the end of her work with the retailer and her lawsuit concern. The tool is not named, and the company denies any AI alteration of her image.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["depicted_or_impersonated"]},"name":"Spokane: an appliance retailer's longtime spokeswoman sues after its ad agency admits AI voice edits to her ads; she says she never consented","summary":"Amber George was the spokeswoman for Fred's Appliance, a Spokane-area retailer, for 14 years. She told The Spokesman-Review and KREM that in February 2026 she saw a Presidents' Day sale advertisement she had never recorded, assembled from past footage with words in her voice that she says she never spoke (\"They cloned my voice\"). Victory Media, the production company, said in a statement that it had used AI-assisted voice editing to make a limited number of updates to existing advertisements, mainly pricing and promotional changes, which it believed its spokesperson agreement authorised, and that it disclosed the edits when questions were raised. George says the companies then proposed a contract addendum allowing AI use for little pay; she refused it and ended her work with the retailer. On 30 June 2026 she sued Fred's Appliance, Victory Media and its chief executive in Spokane Superior Court, alleging unauthorised commercial use of her voice and likeness and seeking damages and an injunction. Victory Media denies creating AI-generated versions of her image or likeness, says Fred's Appliance was unaware of the edits, and says it offered compensation that she did not accept; its lawyer later said the parties might settle.","incidentDate":"2026-02-01","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"month","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2026-07-01","aiSystem":"Unnamed AI-assisted voice editing used by the production company Victory Media to change words in existing Fred's Appliance advertisements voiced by the spokeswoman","aiProduct":"Unidentified voice-cloning tool","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["professional_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"George says advertisements carried words in her voice that she never spoke and was never asked about, that the AI use diminishes her value as a spokeswoman because she cannot control what words come out of her mouth, and that she ended her 14-year work with the retailer after refusing an AI addendum. These are her own and her lawsuit's allegations; the companies say the edits were authorised by contract.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person: Amber George, whose voice was edited in the advertisements and who brought the suit. Viewers of the advertisements are an audience and are not counted.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"US-WA","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"lawsuit_filed","outcomeStatus":"pending","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2026/jul/01/longtime-spokeswoman-sues-freds-appliance-over-use/","primarySourceLabel":"The Spokesman-Review, 1 July 2026: Longtime spokeswoman sues Fred's Appliance over use of AI likeness","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-12T03:13:14.78748+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-12T03:13:14.78748+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["voice-cloning","ai-voice-editing","advertising","spokesperson","consent","likeness","lawsuit","spokane","depicted-or-impersonated","institutional-use"]}]}