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
3
Countries with reported events
2
Located 3 of 3 cases · 0 unknown
Languages in checked sources
2
Recorded for 3 of 3 cases
3Core concern
AI communicated, acted for, depicted or impersonated 1Contextual cases
AI made a decision or claim about someone

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.

0cases with a recorded lawsuit outcome 0cases with a recorded regulatory response 0cases involving minors

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

When events happened

0 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.

1 20222 2026
Reported severity MediumLow
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

3 of 1101 published cases

Export JSONExport CSV
5 Sept 2026United StatesGoogle AI Overviews (reported)

Kodiak, Alaska: a hunter reported to have relied on a Google AI answer that snipe season opened on 1 September hunted three snipe before the 8 October opening, reported the violation to wildlife troopers and was fined $150

Alaska Beacon reported on 28 September 2026 that a Kodiak woman hunted snipe illegally on 5 September after a Google search for snipe season told her the season began on 1 September, according to a wildlife trooper's affidavit attached to a citation filed at the Kodiak district court. The outlet describes the answer as a Google AI overview. She hunted three snipe, grew suspicious on learning that duck season did not open until 8 October, checked the regulations and called troopers to report herself. The outlet reports the trooper said he ran an identical Google search and received identical incorrect information. She pleaded no contest and was fined $150, and told the outlet she felt shame and embarrassment. A Department of Public Safety spokesman said it was the first time he thought the agency had seen AI cited, and that she had acted correctly once she learned of the mistake. Google did not respond to the outlet's request for comment.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 05/10/2026

Feb 2022 to Mar 2026United StatesGoogle AI Overviews (reported)

Alleged fake 49ers player romance-investment fraud: FBI affidavit says search engines and AI 'occasionally stated' he was a real player when victims checked

Federal prosecutors in Oregon have charged two men with wire fraud and conspiracy over an alleged romance-investment scheme run from at least February 2022 until at least March 2026. The FBI affidavit says investigators have identified 26 women they believe are victims, whom the two 'defrauded or attempted to defraud'; elsewhere it says all 26 sent money 'believing the money was being invested on their behalf'. Twelve of the thirteen victim accounts in the affidavit describe money sent or loaned, and one says she did not invest. The Los Angeles Times, citing the U.S. Attorney's Office, reports at least 26 women and $1.3 million across four states. With some victims, the main accused posed as a San Francisco 49ers player. The affidavit says that some victims became suspicious and searched for him online, and that because of his false social media posts, 'search engines and artificial intelligence occasionally stated' that he was a bona fide 49ers player. The Los Angeles Times describes an Instagram Story in which he displayed a screenshot of a Google AI Overview calling him a 49ers wide receiver and said, 'That's Google. That's not me, that's Google.' The 49ers and the NFL told investigators he was never employed by either. The charges are allegations; the sources do not say how many victims saw an AI-generated answer or how much it weighed in their decisions.

Core concern Medium reported severity Criminal Charges

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 29/09/2026

2 Jun 2026PortugalGemini (reported)

Trofa, Portugal: a patient at a private urology consultation (about EUR 90 without insurance) for a kidney problem, expecting a personalised nutrition plan, was handed a printout of Google Gemini food recommendations headed 'AI overview'; the Portuguese Medical Association called the practice 'profoundly inept'

According to Correio da Manhã, during a urology consultation at the Trofa Saúde Hospital da Trofa on 2 June 2026, a patient being followed for a kidney problem expected a personalised nutrition plan but received a printed sheet of food recommendations headed 'vista geral de IA' ('AI overview'), generated by Google's Gemini. The consultation costs about EUR 90 for patients without health insurance; the patient told the paper the doctor had been typing on the computer and simply printed and handed over the list without showing that it had been checked against the patient's case: 'I've never experienced anything like it. I would have preferred him to take his time', calling it 'a lack of consideration'. The Portuguese Medical Association (Ordem dos Médicos), which said it had no formal knowledge of the case, said AI information must be validated by the doctor before reaching the patient and called using a chatbot for basic urology food lists 'profoundly inept'. Trofa Saúde did not respond to the paper over three weeks.

Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 29/09/2026

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.