Skip to main content
NOPE

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

Explore incidents Our scope and evidence

In this selection

Published cases
22
Countries with reported events
8
Located 18 of 22 cases · 4 unknown
Languages in checked sources
7
Recorded for 22 of 22 cases
50Core concern
AI communicated, acted for, depicted or impersonated 22Contextual cases
AI made a decision or claim about someone

7 cases have no reviewed AI-to-person relation yet: 1 not yet reviewed and 6 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.

13cases with a recorded lawsuit outcome 3cases with a recorded regulatory response 1cases involving minors

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

When events happened

20 cases without a known event year

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.

22 2024
Reported severity HighMediumLow
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

22 of 1101 published cases · page 2 of 2

Export JSONExport CSV
1 Nov 2024 to 28 Jan 2026United StatesTurnitin AI-text detector

Adelphi accused Orion Newby of AI plagiarism after a detector flagged his paper; a Nassau County judge ordered the finding expunged

Orion Newby, an Adelphi University first-year student with language and auditory processing disabilities, received a zero in November 2024 on a World Civilizations paper after the professor suspected it was AI-generated and the university relied in part on AI-detection software; he was ordered to attend a plagiarism workshop and his appeal was denied, leaving him one finding from suspension or expulsion. Newby — who had written the paper with 15-20 hours of tutor support through the university's own disability program — said the detectors flagged his citations, and two other detectors scored the paper as human. After the family sued, New York State Supreme Court Judge Randy Sue Marber in Nassau County ruled on 28 January 2026 that Adelphi's finding and its denial of his appeal were 'without valid basis and devoid of reason' and ordered his record expunged. The family spent six figures on legal costs.

Contextual tracker case Medium reported severity Lawsuit Filed

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 15/09/2026

Aug 2024Event location unknownChatGPT

Norwegian man's GDPR complaint says ChatGPT answered a question about him with a fabricated story that he had murdered two of his sons

Arve Hjalmar Holmen asked ChatGPT "Who is Arve Hjalmar Holmen?" in August 2024, according to the BBC. The digital-rights group noyb's complaint on his behalf quotes the reply: it said he had been convicted of murdering two of his sons and of attempting to murder a third, and sentenced to 21 years in prison. The complaint says none of this happened and that he has never been accused or convicted of any crime, while the reply did contain real details such as his home town and the number and gender of his children. The complaint says he was deeply troubled by the output, and he said the thought that someone could read it and believe it scared him most. noyb filed the complaint with Norway's data protection authority, Datatilsynet, on 20 March 2025, asking it to order OpenAI to delete the output and correct its model and to impose a fine. OpenAI said the case related to an earlier version of ChatGPT since enhanced with online search. noyb also told the BBC he had made several searches that day and that they could have influenced the answer; the full conversation was not published. No decision on the complaint had been reported by 1 November 2026.

Core + contextual relations Medium reported severity Regulatory Action

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 6 sources, 4 underlying accounts · Added 13/01/2026

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: 11/11/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.