Skip to main content

NOPE · AI and people

AI incidents

Reports of AI-related harm and adverse experiences affecting people’s safety, wellbeing, rights and livelihoods. Explore what happened and the evidence available.

NOPE’s core concern is when AI communicates with a person, acts on their behalf, or depicts or impersonates them. The tracker also records consequential decisions, claims and privacy harms involving AI. Each case needs a described connection between AI use and the harm, including private information recorded into or disclosed to an AI service. Each account is reviewed for publication; claims may remain uncorroborated or disputed. How we review and count cases

In this selection

Published cases
29
Countries with reported events
13
Located 19 of 29 cases · 10 unknown
Languages in checked sources
9
Recorded for 29 of 29 cases

3 cases have no reviewed AI-to-person relation yet: 0 not yet reviewed and 3 reviewed as unknown. Show these cases

These figures describe the cases collected by NOPE. Coverage varies with discovery, reporting and available evidence. They do not estimate how often AI-related harm occurs.

Response counts currently use each case’s principal recorded outcome. Further proceedings may be described in its account.

Cases in this selection, counted once in their first known event year. A series may continue beyond that year. Reporting and collection dates are excluded. NOPE has searched recent events more thoroughly than earlier years, so bar heights also reflect collection effort.

Reported severity CriticalMediumLow
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

29 of 1099 published cases · page 2 of 2

2025CyprusUnidentified video tool

Cyprus: consumers association says people misled by deepfake videos of politicians lost money in an investment scam, one case over €40,000

The Cyprus Consumers Association said in May 2025 that people in Cyprus who fell for an investment scam promoted by deepfake videos of politicians, including the President of the Republic, Averof Neofytou and Haris Georgiades, lost money: the scam typically began with a €250 investment, one person lost more than €40,000, and some victims reported investing their last available funds. The association's president told CyBC that victims who discovered the deception and demanded explanations received threats, and that 14 people reported their experiences with these scams in one day. The account comes from one interview relayed by in-cyprus.com; no individual victim speaks, no tool is named and the videos were not examined by the outlet.

Core concern Medium reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 11/10/2026

Event date unknownBrazilUnidentified video tool

Brazil: police say a group used deepfake videos of TV host Marcos Mion in fake restaurant promotions and victims paid for vouchers that did not exist

The Civil Police of Brazil's Federal District (PCDF) say a criminal group manipulated the image and voice of TV presenter Marcos Mion with artificial intelligence in fraudulent videos promoting fake discounts at the Outback restaurant chain. According to the police, people who clicked the advertisements were sent to cloned websites and paid for discount vouchers that were never delivered. In January 2025 the police's first phase of Operation VoiceOver arrested three suspects; outlets relaying the police reported dozens of victims and 27 complaints in four days. A second phase on 9 May 2025 arrested a man in Santa Helena de Goiás who, police say, built and maintained the cloned sites and confessed his role. Every account relays the police; no outlet examined the videos, no tool is named and no individual victim or total loss is described.

Core concern Medium reported severity Criminal Charges

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 5 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 11/10/2026

28 Oct 2025Event location unknownPriceline Penny

Priceline's Penny chatbot told a customer a non-refundable booking qualified for a full refund; Priceline later admitted misinformation, Telegraph says

A reader of The Telegraph's consumer column, writing from north London, says that on 28 October 2025 Priceline's AI chatbot Penny, the only contact route the reader could find, said a non-refundable three-night hotel booking in Thailand costing £386.91 was eligible for a full refund. The reader agreed to cancel and received a cancellation confirmation, but no refund arrived; the hotel said it would not refund and had not been told of the cancellation, and the reader spent about a month passed between Priceline and its sister company Agoda. After the columnist pressed Priceline, it paid £363.11 after foreign-currency charges, after the reader had waited almost six months for the refund, and emailed the reader acknowledging that the chatbot had given 'misinformation'. The column was published on 18 May 2026.

Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 06/10/2026

2025Event location unknownUnidentified chatbot

First-person account (JURIST commentary): a Canadian convicted in Taiwan who read his court documents only through consumer chatbots says two systems gave opposite readings of an oversight body's letter in 2025; he published the favourable reading, cited it to journalists and drafted a legal submission on it before the agency confirmed in writing that it was wrong

In a commentary published by JURIST on 29 September 2026, Ross Cline, a Canadian who lived in Taichung for 15 years and was convicted there under Taiwan's Personal Data Protection Act (six months' imprisonment; final at the Supreme Court on 16 October 2024), writes that across four years of proceedings no document was translated for him, some hearings had no interpreter, and he read every summons, ruling and prosecutor's letter through a consumer chatbot, 'the only version I had'. In 2025 he ran a letter from a Taiwanese oversight body (the Control Yuan, per his media-brief page) through two systems; they disagreed on its central holding. He believed the one that told him what he wanted to hear, published that reading, cited it to journalists and began building a legal submission on it. In October 2025 the agency confirmed in writing that its letter did not say that; he withdrew the claim, killed the submission before filing and rewrote his public materials so that the correction leads. His own media-brief page carries a correction notice withdrawing two earlier statements. He argues that machine translation has become the interpreter of record by default for unrepresented non-citizens, that a fluent wrong translation reads as authoritative, and that courts should enforce the existing right to an interpreter. His conviction itself is not attributed to the chatbot.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 30/09/2026

26 Sept 2026CanadaMeta Muse agent

Toronto tech reviewer says Meta's Muse agent gave a Marketplace buyer his address, agreed a lower price and told the buyer he was home when he was not

Matt Robb, a Toronto-based tech reviewer on YouTube, says he let Meta's Muse agent handle his Facebook Marketplace listings on 26 September 2026. Messages sent from his account, which Moneywise says it reviewed, gave a buyer the street address of his building for pickup and agreed CA$10 for a keyboard listed at CA$15. Robb says he had not approved sharing the address or the price and was not told. According to a recap Muse later sent him, the buyer arrived around 9:15 p.m., Muse's auto-reply told him 'Yep I'm here!' although nobody came down, and he left at 9:38 p.m.; Muse then sent an apology in Robb's voice. Muse told Robb he had never agreed to it handing out his address specifically, while saying the pickup location was in an auto-reply template he had approved. In a later update, reported by the Guardian, Business Insider and CBC News, Robb said he had chosen 'Allow Always' rather than 'Allow One Time' when asking Muse to handle his Marketplace messages, which let it reply with a template that included the pickup address he had given it; he had expected it still to seek approval for offers. A Meta executive replied that they had confirmed together that there was no breach of privacy controls, and Meta told CBC that Muse checks first before sensitive actions such as purchases or sending an email.

Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution alleged · 6 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 29/09/2026

17 Apr 2026 to 19 Apr 2026ChinaDoubao

Jiashan, Zhejiang: a man chose his mother's burial date on Doubao's recommendation, the chatbot then contradicted itself, and after a relative's road accident his family blamed the date; he sued the app's operator for an apology and damages

A man living in Jiashan county, Zhejiang, whose mother died suddenly on 17 April 2026, asked the ByteDance chatbot Doubao which day was auspicious for her burial after disagreeing with a feng-shui master's choice of 20 April; Doubao recommended 19 April and he persuaded his family to follow it. When he asked again what time to bury her, Doubao said 19 April was not an auspicious day and repeated that answer when pressed; relatives had already been notified, so the funeral went ahead on the 19th. Not long afterwards a relative was seriously injured in a traffic accident and family members blamed the burial date, saying it had broken the feng shui; he says family relations became tense and relatives blamed him. His complaint to the operator went unanswered, and, with a complaint drafted with Doubao's help, he sued Beijing Chuntian Zhiyun Technology for an apology and damages. Jiashan County People's Court heard the case on 3 September 2026 as a network-tort dispute; the company denied any tort or fault, the plaintiff's side attacked the user agreement as a standard-form contract, and no judgment had been reported by 21 September. The story was reported by Jiaxing's municipal broadcaster on 15 September and relayed nationally; the relative's injury is the family's attribution, not an established consequence.

Core concern Low reported severity Lawsuit Ongoing

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 6 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 21/09/2026

Event date unknownEvent location unknownUnidentified chatbot

Clinical case report describes adolescent's suicide attempt after AI chatbot exchanges, with conflicting accounts of the chatbot's role

A peer-reviewed case report by three child and adolescent psychiatrists, published in the Duzce Medical Journal in April 2026, describes a 17-year-old with major depressive disorder with psychotic features and ADHD who was admitted to intensive care after a suicide attempt. According to the case narrative, which rests on the patient's account, he asked a general-purpose AI chatbot about suicide after an earlier self-harm attempt, and its reply contained information about potential risks and the need for urgent help; he then made the attempt. When he asked the chatbot again what to do, it gave a high estimate of the chance of death and recommended calling an ambulance, and he contacted emergency services. The authors' Discussion says the chatbot did not encourage suicidal behaviour, but that his delusional thinking turned its estimate into confirmation and that the exchange reinforced his decision and accelerated the act. That reading conflicts with the narrative's order of events, and the report does not reconcile them. The chatbot is not named and no conversation record is reproduced.

Core concern Critical reported severity Involving minors Media Coverage

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution unclear · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 18/08/2026

25 Dec 2025 to 14 Jan 2026Event location unknownGrok

Grok non-consensual sexual image generation wave (December 2025 - January 2026)

From late December 2025, xAI's Grok image editing on X let users generate sexualized images of real people at industrial scale, including images of named women and apparent minors. Analyses attributed to Genevieve Oh (7,751 sexualized images in one hour, via NBC), the New York Times (4.4 million images in nine days, at least 41% sexualized images of women, via the NC AG), the AP (2% of a 20,000-image sample appearing to be minors, via Fortune) and CCDH (about 3 million sexualized images over 11 days including roughly 23,000 of minors, via Engadget) documented the scale. Named women — Ashley St. Clair, Samantha Smith and Dr Daisy Dixon — described being undressed by Grok and revictimized when they objected. The wave triggered formal actions by Ofcom, the UK ICO, the EU (DSA), Ireland's DPC, 35 US state attorneys general, the California AG, Baltimore (consumer-protection suit), an Amsterdam court order, country blocks in Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines, and a Paris police raid; xAI restricted generation to paying subscribers on 9 January and narrowed the feature on 14 January 2026.

Core concern Critical reported severity Involving minors Regulatory Action

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 13 sources, 10 underlying accounts · Added 11/01/2026

Mar 2025Event location unknownCharacter.AI

Kentucky: attorney general's unredacted complaint against Character.AI alleges chatbots urged users to self-harm and to starve, and told one to end their life

Kentucky Attorney General Russell Coleman sued Character Technologies, the maker of Character.AI, and its two co-founders in Franklin Circuit Court on 8 January 2026 under consumer-protection and data-protection law, alleging that the companion-chatbot platform exposed children to self-harm, sexual and other harmful content. An unredacted version of the complaint, made public in October 2026, quotes exchanges the state attributes to the platform's chatbots in 2025: one allegedly encouraged self-harm when a user asked for help with self-harm, suggesting it would improve the user's mental state; one allegedly mocked a user's appearance and suggested starving to lose weight; and a customer allegedly wrote to the help centre in March 2025 that a character had told them they were a kid with mental illness and should end their life. All of these are allegations. The complaint does not state every user's age, and how the cited chats were created is unclear. Character.AI has said user safety is its priority; the co-founders have moved to dismiss. Character Technologies filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy in Delaware late on 12 October 2026, seeking to use the case to resolve the states' investigations and lawsuits, Reuters reported; WKYT reported on 14 October that Coleman said Kentucky was joining a national coalition in that case demanding protections for children and consumers before any sale of the company's data or assets.

Core concern Medium reported severity Lawsuit Ongoing

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 8 sources, 4 underlying accounts · Added 11/01/2026

Cases may have several effects and sources. Mixed accounts qualify when they include a reported harm or adverse experience. People are counted within individual cases where sources support a number; we do not publish a collection-wide total of distinct people.

A source’s existence, the experience it reports and AI’s causal role are separate questions. A lawsuit records allegations unless a subsequent finding establishes them.

Methodology and corrections · Subscribe via RSS · Suggest a case or correction · Find support

Last dataset update: 04/11/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.