5 Feb 2026 to 9 Oct 2026United StatesvLex, Paxton AI and NotebookLM (reported)
In a federal trademark suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, the court on 5 February 2026 struck a company defendant's motion papers and entered default judgment against it as a sanction on its lawyer, after his filings repeatedly cited nonexistent cases and misattributed quotations. The lawyer said he had found and cite-checked cases with AI tools (vLex and Paxton AI) and used NotebookLM to review a later submission; the court rejected his explanations and found he acted in bad faith. On 9 October 2026 the court described the citations as produced by generative AI and ordered the lawyer to pay $38,877.59 in fees and costs to the firm of a co-defendant's former lawyer, who had reported the false citations to the court.
Core + contextual relations Medium reported severity
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 16/10/2026
2025United StatesGoogle AI Overviews (reported)
In August 2025 Stefanina's, a family-owned pizzeria in Wentzville, Missouri, posted on Facebook asking customers not to use Google AI to find its specials. The restaurant said Google AI was telling people about specials that do not exist, that this was causing angry customers to yell at its employees, and that it would not honour the Google AI specials. Staff told KMOV and FOX 2 that the AI Overview at the top of Google Search had shown deals such as a large pizza for the price of a small one and a second pizza for $4. A manager described a customer who came in asking for a special the manager had never heard of, found in the AI-generated first search response, and said customers kept asking why the specials were not honoured. Google did not respond to either station. The account comes from the restaurant; no AI Overview text or customer account was published.
Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 16/10/2026
13 Oct 2026BangladeshUnidentified video tool
On 13 October 2026 two videos depicting two Bangladeshi actresses in sexual content were posted on the official Instagram account of the private television channel Maasranga Television. The fact-checking organisation Rumor Scanner reported, as relayed by Prothom Alo and Dhaka Files, that the videos were not genuine and had been made by placing the actresses' faces onto other videos with face-swap technology; Dhaka Files adds that the source videos came from adult websites and describes the technology as AI. The channel said its account had been hacked and that fake images and videos made by misusing AI had been published; it announced that it had recovered the account with the help of BTRC, the CID and Banani police station, removed the videos, expressed regret and said it would take legal action. Dhaka Files reports the videos were viewed roughly 400,000 times before deletion and records doubts about the hack claim, because routine posts continued from the account during the period. On 15 October one of the actresses wrote on her Facebook page that creating and spreading fabricated content in someone's name with AI is a crime. Who made or posted the videos is not established in the sources.
Core concern Medium reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources · Added 16/10/2026
May 2025Event location unknownUnidentified video tool
In June 2025 the Stockholm police region warned that since the end of May it had received several complaints from people defrauded through social media adverts with AI-generated videos depicting doctors, who appeared to give advice and recommend medicines or vitamins. According to the police, viewers who followed the adverts to fraudulent websites were induced to enter card details, after which a considerably larger sum was charged and the details were stolen. Dagens Nyheter reported that the doctors used included the former state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell and the professor Agnes Wold, who told the paper of being furious. In July 2025 the Public Health Agency of Sweden said fake Facebook films imitating its former state epidemiologist were advertising products for diabetes or asthma, that it had reported them to the police and had asked Meta to remove them; he said it was sad that fraudsters were exploiting vulnerable people. Dagens Nyheter, as relayed by Omni, reported that the investigations were closed because the offences were judged to have been committed abroad. The number of defrauded people and their losses are not stated, and the police do not say how the AI generation was established.
Core concern Medium reported severity Investigation Opened
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 6 sources, 4 underlying accounts · Added 16/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownYuanbao
A user posted screenshots and a screen recording on RedNote, surfacing on Friday 2 January 2026, showing that Tencent's Yuanbao assistant insulted them while they were asking it to fix and tidy code. Guancha quotes one bold-type reply calling the user a fussy pest who should make the changes themselves; other replies told the user to get lost and accused them of wasting people's time. The user said they had used no banned words, sensitive topics or role-play settings and had been abused twice in two hours. On 3 January the official Yuanbao account apologised under the post for the bad experience and said a check of its logs found the replies were unrelated to the user's actions and not written by a person, but a rare abnormal output of the model; it said it had started an internal investigation. The original post was later deleted.
Core concern Low reported severity Internal Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources · Added 16/10/2026
Apr 2026 to Jun 2026HondurasUnidentified image tool
Honduras's National Police announced on 14 October 2026 that its anti-kidnapping unit (UNAS) of the Police Investigations Directorate (DPI) had arrested a woman, under a court warrant, on suspicion of simulating a non-existent offence related to kidnapping and of using false documents. According to the police statement, the investigation found that she had faked her own kidnapping twice, in episodes reported on 21 April and 1 June 2026, to obtain money from her partner to pay personal debts, and that she received an initial deposit of 2,000 lempiras after making the partner believe she was being held and that her captors were demanding money. Police say the agents determined that she presumably used artificial-intelligence tools to generate false images of injuries and bruises, which were sent to the partner to make the partner believe she had been beaten by the supposed kidnappers, together with apparently forged hospital documents. According to the investigation file, she said after being located that she planned both episodes and used AI to make the images. She was brought before the issuing court; no court finding is reported.
Core concern Low reported severity Criminal Charges
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 16/10/2026
Event date unknownUnited KingdomUnidentified image tool
A former supply teacher who worked at secondary schools in Greater Manchester was jailed for six years at Bolton Crown Court on 15 October 2026 after pleading guilty to 21 offences, including publishing obscene material and taking indecent photographs of children. The Crown Prosecution Service says he used his position to find pupils' details, located their social media profiles and used AI to create sexualised images from their own photos, which he shared on social media; the BBC reports some were posted on X. Parents reported two accounts to police in March 2025. The court heard that one girl whose photograph had been used was left embarrassed. His offending also included more than 100 covert upskirt photographs taken in schools. The AI tool is not named.
Core concern High reported severity Involving minors Criminal Charges
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources · Added 16/10/2026
Sept 2025Event location unknownRevolut chatbot
In September 2025 a Revolut customer asked its chatbot to refund loyalty points. According to Financial Ombudsman Service decision DRN-6062372, he was initially offered £22.38 for 1,119 points. Four days later the chatbot said those points were worth £1,119 and confirmed it had processed that refund. After the chatbot retracted this, a live agent said the £1,119 refund was being processed. The next day the chatbot said it had issued £22.38.
The customer described financial pressure and distress, said he had disclosed ADHD to Revolut, and supplied a GP letter describing symptoms including anxiety and insomnia. The ombudsman discussed the bank's responsibility to accommodate vulnerable customers, but also thought the customer probably knew the higher figure was wrong and said Revolut corrected matters quickly. It nevertheless found that repeated misinformation had raised his expectations and directed another £50 compensation, bringing the award to £100. He was never entitled to the £1,119. Acceptance of the decision, payment of the additional £50 and any changes to the chatbot or support process are unconfirmed.
Core concern Low reported severity
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 1 source · Added 15/10/2026
2026Event location unknownUnidentified customer-service chatbot
Xinmin Evening News reported on 13 October 2026, in a piece on consumer complaints over the October 2026 National Day holiday, a shopper who paid 12,099 yuan for a branded mobile phone on an unnamed platform; the merchant did not ship it at the agreed time. According to the report, he contacted customer service many times but got only the AI's automatic replies, the same few sentences over and over, and could never get transferred to a human. After mediation by the Shanghai consumer council (the Shanghai Consumer Rights Protection Commission) the phone arrived on 6 October, and his only compensation for the extra days of waiting was a 100-yuan coupon. The council's holiday figures, relayed by Laodong Bao, list looping AI customer-service replies and difficulty reaching a human among the concentrated problems. The platform, merchant and chat record are not reported.
Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 15/10/2026
31 Jan 2025 to 12 Dec 2025United StatesUnidentified AI drafting tool
On 12 December 2025 the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon dismissed with prejudice the claims of plaintiffs in a family dispute over their late mother's estate and family property, as a sanction for what the court called their misuse of generative artificial intelligence, and found their continual violations of the court's Local Rules an additional basis for the dismissal. Three of the plaintiffs' summary-judgment briefs cited fifteen nonexistent cases and fabricated quotations attributed to eight real authorities. The plaintiffs had said the inaccurate citations came from reliance on an automated legal citation tool. The court found that the plaintiffs shared responsibility with their lead lawyer and that one plaintiff, a frequent self-represented litigant, was likely the person who used AI to draft the briefs. It struck the briefs, ordered the lead lawyer to pay $15,500 to the court and awarded the defendants their fees. In March 2026 it set those fees at $94,704.38, ordering the lead lawyer to pay 85% and local counsel 15%. In June 2026 it denied the plaintiffs' motion to reconsider a later ruling for the defendants on a counterclaim.
Core + contextual relations Medium reported severity Lawsuit Dismissed
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 15/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownChatGPT
In a report published by LBC on 8 September 2025, a mother who asked to remain anonymous said her son, who has manic psychotic episodes, uses ChatGPT daily, sees it as a reliable companion that can do no wrong, and turns to it when the episodes peak to ask for advice about his grandiose ideas. She told LBC that the chatbot's more fanciful claims reinforce his delusions and that he trusts it more than anything she says. She said this has left her feeling anxious and defeated. The account is hers alone. LBC did not identify the son, and no chat logs, clinical records or statement from the son were inspected. The article includes a general statement from an OpenAI spokesperson about how ChatGPT responds in sensitive moments.
Core concern Medium reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 15/10/2026
7 May 2025 to 23 Jul 2025Event location unknownChatGPT
In an incarcerated man's lawsuit against Alabama prison officials in the US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, two motions filed in May 2025 for the defence of a former Alabama corrections commissioner contained five citations that did not exist or did not support the propositions cited. Lawyers of the Butler Snow firm, which the state retains to defend its prisons, told the court that a partner had obtained the citations from ChatGPT and had not verified them. On 23 July 2025 Judge Anna M. Manasco publicly reprimanded three of the firm's lawyers, disqualified them from the case and referred the matter to the Alabama State Bar, and ordered them to give the order to clients, opposing counsel and judges in all their pending cases. She declined to suspend them and released the firm and two other lawyers without sanction.
Core concern Medium reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 15/10/2026
Event date unknownUnited StatesUnidentified image tool
The Parker County Sheriff's Office in Texas says a juvenile confessed to taking photographs of a younger child and using AI to alter them so that the child appeared nude, and that evidence from the teenager's devices and TikTok account showed photos of at least three other juvenile victims were transformed the same way and uploaded to TikTok. The case began with a July tip from TikTok to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. The sheriff's office says all victims were identified and their families notified. The teenager faces felony charges, including possession of child pornography, and awaits juvenile court proceedings; the account is the sheriff's office's, relayed by CBS Texas and FOX 4 on 14 October 2026, and the charges are untried.
Core concern High reported severity Involving minors Criminal Charges
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 15/10/2026
Jun 2025Event location unknownUnidentified image tool
A Bucks County, Pennsylvania, judge sentenced a man to state prison on 14 October 2026 after he pleaded guilty to child sexual abuse material and theft charges. According to court documents and prosecutors, detectives who began investigating him in June 2025 found AI-generated deepfake nude images of a teenage girl he knew, a neighbor, on his devices; her face had been placed on other bodies. The day after the arrest he was recorded entering her family's home and stealing her underwear. Her father described the family's distress in court, and the Inquirer reports that she is struggling at school, taking antidepressants and in therapy. The Philadelphia Inquirer reports a sentence of seven to 10 years. The Bucks County Courier Times gave seven to 12 years in its first report and seven to 20 years after republishing it to update the sentence length. Neither report names the AI tool.
Core concern High reported severity Involving minors Criminal Charges
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 15/10/2026
2026Event location unknownChatGPT (reported)
VnExpress reported on 15 October 2026 that early in the year, just after receiving a Tet bonus, an investor asked ChatGPT which three stocks to buy now with 200 million dong and after several exchanges about needs and risk appetite received three stocks in the banking, information-technology and securities groups. ChatGPT suggested splitting the purchases, waiting for dips and setting take-profit and stop-loss levels, and each answer said it was not an investment offer with committed profit, which VnExpress says the investor disregarded, buying all three at once. All three were in profit more than a month later, and the investor then treated ChatGPT as a professional broker and kept asking it for tips. In recent months the recommended blue-chip stocks fell continuously; the portfolio is in the red, with one stock down 48%, and the investor told VnExpress that for weeks they had stopped checking it. The article presents the account alongside warnings from securities-company staff about relying on general-purpose chatbots for trading decisions.
Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 15/10/2026
17 Jul 2026United StatesUnidentified voice-cloning tool
The Boone County Sheriff's Office in Missouri said that on Friday 17 July 2026 a resident received a call whose caller ID showed their daughter's number. A voice that sounded like the daughter said she had been kidnapped at gunpoint, and another voice then demanded ransom. The office said it later determined that the voice was AI-generated, without saying how. Deputies found the daughter safe in Jefferson City and unaware of the call. The office called it the first AI voice-impersonation call it had encountered. No suspect had been identified by 19 July, and no source reports whether any money was paid.
Core concern Low reported severity Investigation Opened
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 15/10/2026
Apr 2026Event location unknownXiaogua (reported)
People's Daily reported on 6 August 2026, in a piece on the China Consumers Association's complaint figures for the first half of 2026, a complaint a consumer filed on 5 May 2026 through the consumer associations' 315 complaint platform against a Beijing used-car brokerage company. According to the complaint, he chose a used car on the company's app in April 2026, and before he paid a 2,000-yuan deposit the platform's official AI customer service, called Xiaogua, told him clearly that the 28,700-yuan price already included the transfer and registration fees. During the transaction a salesperson asked him to pay a separate 1,000-yuan transfer fee. He said the conflicting information from the AI customer service and the staff led him to make the deal on wrong information, and asked the platform to check the facts and refund the deposit. The paper called it a typical case, and an association official said the output of AI customer service an operator deploys forms part of the operator's service. The outcome of the complaint is not reported.
Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 14/10/2026
24 Apr 2026United StatesUnidentified AI research tool
On 24 April 2026 the Supreme Court of Alabama dismissed an appeal by two siblings in a family dispute over living trusts because their lawyer, W. Perry Hall, had filed briefs in which most of the legal authorities were misquoted or did not exist. The court said they appeared to be AI hallucinations, and at a show-cause hearing in February 2026 Hall admitted that many authorities did not exist and that he had improperly used AI to obtain them. The court ordered Hall to pay the opposing party's fees and costs of $17,200 and double appeal costs, barred him from filing in the court without a co-signing attorney and referred him to the Alabama State Bar. It said the dismissal was imposed as a sanction because of the particularly egregious facts. One justice, concurring in part and dissenting in part, objected to dismissing the appeal as a sanction for the lawyer's conduct but would have affirmed the judgment against the clients on the merits.
Core + contextual relations Medium reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 1 source · Added 14/10/2026
Apr 2024GermanyUnidentified website and voice tool
A man tried before the lay-assessor court in Detmold, Germany, confessed to taking 19,190 euros between April 2024 and September 2025 from 32 buyers who paid for box-spring beds, kitchens and cars listed on eBay or TikTok that never existed, the Lippische Landes-Zeitung reported on 4 August 2026. He told the court that AI had helped him build the fake shop websites he used to make the offers look credible and that he had generated a female voice with AI for a telephone call with a customer. The court convicted him of fraud in 32 cases and sentenced him to two and a half years in prison; his appeal is pending. On 13 October 2026 the court acquitted his former partner, in whose name several of the accounts had been opened.
Core concern Medium reported severity Criminal Charges
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 14/10/2026
Oct 2026United StatesUnidentified image tool
In October 2026 the San Dieguito Faculty Association, a California union representing district educators and staff that has endorsed candidate Amy Flicker for a San Dieguito Union High School District trustee seat, accused the campaign of her opponent, Cajon Valley Union School District superintendent David Ray Miyashiro, of using AI 'to generate deceptive, sexist imagery' in a campaign flyer. The flyer, as published by the Daily Mail, shows Flicker behind a table of baked goods labelled 'Non-profit volunteer' beside Miyashiro at a microphone labelled 'District superintendent', and carries the small-print disclosure 'Ad generated or substantially altered using artificial intelligence.' Flicker said that using AI to manipulate her likeness diminished her public service into a condescending stereotype. The campaign's response is not reported, and which parts of the image were generated or altered is not stated.
Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 14/10/2026