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

1 case has no reviewed AI-to-person relation yet: 0 not yet reviewed and 1 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

1 case 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.

3 2026
Reported severity HighMediumLow
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

3 of 613 published cases

Export JSONExport CSV
13 Aug 2026 to 8 Sept 2026United StatesSentinel AI (reported)

Lawsuit says a New Jersey employer dismissed a remote worker who sought exemption from AI facial-recognition webcam monitoring

NorthJersey.com reported on 5 October 2026 that a former remote employee of Sutherland Healthcare Solutions, based in Clifton, New Jersey, sued the company in New Jersey Superior Court in Atlantic City on 23 September 2026. According to the complaint as reported, the employer told the employee it would start monitoring her through her work laptop's webcam with software called Sentinel AI, which would use AI and facial recognition to confirm that she was the person at the desk, taking 160 still images in an eight-hour shift. The employee raised concerns in writing about the AI seeing inside her home and about whether the data would be securely stored, said the monitoring had increased her anxiety and stress and worsened a medical condition, and asked for a full or partial exemption as a reasonable accommodation. The suit says the request was denied, she was given a 24-hour ultimatum on 13 August 2026 to submit to the monitoring or resign, an offer to avoid the software by commuting to the office was rejected because it would require six hours of travel time, and her employment was terminated on 8 September 2026. The suit alleges that the employer violated New Jersey's anti-discrimination laws and retaliated against her for requesting reasonable accommodations. Sutherland did not respond to the outlet's requests for comment, and the allegations have not been tested in court.

AI relation unknown Medium reported severity Lawsuit Filed

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 06/10/2026

Sept 2026Event location unknownClaude

First-person forum account: a Claude subscriber with chronic depression who travels between countries on their therapists' advice says an automated fraud check flagged their changing log-in locations, put the paid account on hold and suspended it, cutting off a chatbot they relied on for emotional support and triggering a panic attack and a depressive episode

In a public post to r/depression on 29 September 2026, a Claude subscriber writes that they live with severe chronic depression and, on their therapists' advice, travel constantly, so their log-in locations shift between the Netherlands, Singapore and transit countries. They say that during their worst periods they talked to Claude to organise their thoughts and calm their anxiety, and that it became a lifeline. 'A few days ago', they write, Anthropic's automated fraud system flagged the location changes as suspicious activity; their paid subscription was put on a permanent hold and the account suspended with no human warning or manual review, their card was blacklisted, and support had not answered their emails. Realising they were locked out 'triggered a massive panic attack' and pushed them back into a severe depressive episode. Anthropic's help centre says it may ban accounts for reasons including account creation from an unsupported location and that an organisation paused for unusual activity can request a review; it does not describe the check the poster reports, and whether that check uses AI is not known. The account is uncorroborated.

Core concern Low reported severity

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

2026United StatesGrok

Wyoming plaintiff alleges Grok was used to make about 7,000 AI-generated sexual images and videos from a photograph of the plaintiff as a child

A Wyoming woman who is now an adult and is identified in court filings as Jane Doe 4 alleges that the plaintiff’s stepfather uploaded a photograph of the plaintiff taken in childhood to xAI’s Grok on or before 12 February 2026 and prompted Grok to generate about 7,000 AI-generated sexual images and videos of the plaintiff, and that the stepfather traded them online. The plaintiff joined a proposed class action against xAI in the Northern District of California through an amended complaint filed on 7 July 2026. The complaint alleges that xAI’s report to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children around 12 February 2026 did not include the generated images or the IP address of the upload, that investigators obtained a search warrant on or about 27 February 2026 and found the material, and that the accused died two days later, after release on bail. The plaintiff reports severe distress including depression and suicidal thoughts and told the Washington Post about starting therapy. The complaint says the accused was charged with child exploitation offenses while the plaintiff told the Post that the accused was not charged with child pornography offenses. xAI did not respond to the Post and had not answered the complaint in court. The allegations have not been tested in court. The plaintiff and the accused are not named here, and the images are described only by kind.

Core concern High reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 5 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 30/09/2026

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: 11/10/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.