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 is wider: it also records consequential decisions and claims about people. 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
4
Countries with reported events
1
Located 4 of 4 cases · 0 unknown
Languages in checked sources
1
Recorded for 4 of 4 cases
1Core concern
AI communicated, acted for, depicted or impersonated 1Contextual cases
AI made a decision or claim about someone

2 cases have no reviewed AI-to-person relation yet: 0 not yet reviewed and 2 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.

1cases 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 20181 20212 2025
Reported severity HighLow
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

4 of 392 published cases

Export JSONExport CSV
Nov 2025United StatesAmazon Buy for Me

Mochi Kids owner reports unwanted Amazon AI-agent orders and partner distrust

Mochi Kids' owner told Modern Retail that she received about sixteen Buy for Me orders from November 2025, fulfilling some before discovering their Amazon origin. She said she had chosen to avoid Amazon and subsequently cancelled orders. A wholesale partner that prohibited Amazon sales contacted her after finding its products listed, and she had to explain she had not intentionally listed them. She described distrust. Amazon says its AI purchasing service supports an email opt-out; the source establishes no net financial loss.

AI relation unknown Low reported severity

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources · Added 30/09/2026

Dec 2025United StatesAmazon Buy for Me

Bobo Design Studio owner reports unwanted Amazon AI-agent orders and refunds

Bobo Design Studio's owner told Modern Retail that Amazon's Buy for Me service exposed her catalogue and placed orders through her Shopify store without her opting in. In late December 2025 she discovered orders for unavailable or removed products and cancelled purchases and issued refunds. She described loss of control and pursued an opt-out. Amazon says Buy for Me uses AI agents to place purchases for customers and says businesses can opt out. The source of an incorrect product image is unknown; it is not attributed to AI generation.

AI relation unknown Low reported severity

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources · Added 30/09/2026

14 Aug 2021 to 14 Mar 2024United StatesSt. Louis mugshot recognition (SMRT)

St. Louis County, Missouri: Christopher Gatlin was arrested in August 2021 after officers ran a grainy bus surveillance photo through a regional facial-recognition system and was held roughly 17 months (Post-Dispatch and Bloomberg Law: about two years) on a first-degree assault charge dismissed in March 2024; his federal civil-rights suit (filed January 2025) was amended in August 2026 to add Amazon Web Services, whose Rekognition technology the complaint says underpinned the match

Christopher Gatlin was arrested on 14 August 2021 for an assault at the St. Charles Rock Road MetroLink station after a joint St. Louis County and city team uploaded a grainy, blurry surveillance photograph from a bus into the St. Louis Mugshot Recognition Technology System, a facial-recognition tool that searches stored mug shots (more than 500,000 uploaded, the suit says per the Post-Dispatch; more than 250,000 per Biometric Update via Hoodline), and built the investigation around the resulting match together with a witness identification; he was charged with first-degree assault and held roughly 17 months (the Post-Dispatch says almost two years), a county judge suppressed the witness identification as unconstitutionally suggestive, and prosecutors dismissed the charges on 14 March 2024 (Post-Dispatch; Hoodline citing Biometric Update; Bloomberg Law). Gatlin sued St. Louis County, the City of St. Louis and named officers in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri on 13 January 2025; on 15 October 2025 the court denied the city's motion to dismiss and granted a detective's motion only as to one count; on 13 August 2026 the court allowed a second amended complaint adding Amazon Web Services, which the complaint says supplied the Rekognition program the system used; the county, city and officers answered on 27 August 2026, AWS's response was extended to 21 September 2026 and on 17 September it moved for a further extension to 28 September (no ruling on the docket when read), and a jury trial is set for 1 November 2027 (CourtListener docket). Amazon told the Post-Dispatch that its terms of service prohibit the use of its facial recognition technology in criminal investigations and that it would fully investigate any information that emerges in the litigation. The ACLU lists Gatlin among fourteen people known to have been wrongfully arrested in the US because police relied on erroneous facial-recognition results.

Contextual tracker case High reported severity Lawsuit Ongoing

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 5 sources · Added 26/09/2026

May 2018United StatesAmazon Alexa

Portland couple’s private conversation sent to a contact by Alexa

A Portland couple discovered that their Echo had sent a household conversation to a contact. They unplugged their devices. Amazon acknowledged the incident and attributed it to speech being misinterpreted as commands.

Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 25/09/2026

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: 30/09/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.