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
4
Countries with reported events
4
Located 4 of 4 cases · 0 unknown
Languages in checked sources
3
Recorded for 4 of 4 cases
50Core concern
AI communicated, acted for, depicted or impersonated 2Contextual cases
AI made a decision or claim about someone

4 cases have no reviewed AI-to-person relation yet: 2 not yet reviewed and 2 reviewed as unknown. Show all 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

2 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.

4 2025
Reported severity HighMedium
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

4 of 1099 published cases

Export JSONExport CSV
2025RussiaDeepSeek

Moscow court upholds a sales director's dismissal for disclosing trade secrets, including uploading company reports to DeepSeek, and rejects her severance claim

A Moscow district court upheld an engineering company's dismissal of its head of sales for disclosing trade secrets, according to RAPSI and Pravo.ru reports of 27 July 2026. The grounds included uploading protected internal reports to the Chinese chatbot DeepSeek, forwarding company documents to her personal email and disclosing strategic information to a supplier. The court held that uploading trade secrets to DeepSeek is in itself a disclosure. She had sought a dismissal by mutual agreement and a contractual severance payment of 5 million roubles. The court rejected both, annulled a separate reprimand and awarded her compensation for moral harm. The decision was not yet final.

AI relation unknown Medium reported severity Lawsuit Dismissed

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 4 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 19/10/2026

1 Jul 2025 to 21 Aug 2025AustraliaCommonwealth Bank voice-bot

Australia: Commonwealth Bank announced 45 call centre job cuts it attributed to an AI voice-bot, then reversed them as an error, ABC reports

In late July 2025 the Commonwealth Bank of Australia confirmed to the ABC that it was cutting 45 call centre jobs after rolling out an AI chatbot, and ABC reports the bank had briefed the Finance Sector Union that the cuts were due to AI. The union raised a dispute at the Fair Work Commission and said members found call volumes rose after the bot was introduced. On 21 August 2025 ABC reported that the bank called the decision an error, apologised to the affected employees, said it had not adequately considered all relevant business considerations, and offered them the choice to keep their roles, be redeployed or leave. One employee told Yahoo Finance she had helped train a messaging bot known as Bumblebee, was told in late July her role was redundant, judged the redeployment offer unworkable and accepted voluntary redundancy. The bank's quoted statements say AI made customer help faster; the union calls AI a cover for cost cutting. At the bank's annual general meeting in October 2025, AAP reports, that employee confronted executives in front of shareholders and the chairman said the bank had made a mistake. In October 2026 The Sydney Morning Herald reported that, pressed by a senator at hearings of a federal parliamentary committee on AI, chief executive Matt Comyn owned the error in her case and said he had apologised for it in the past.

AI relation unknown Medium reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 6 sources, 4 underlying accounts · Added 29/09/2026

5 Feb 2025DenmarkUnidentified chatbot

Ringsted rubber-hammer assault planned with an AI chatbot (Denmark)

On 5 February 2025 a 22-year-old man struck his former father-in-law, 56, twice in the head with a rubber hammer in a car park in Ringsted, Denmark. Prosecutors told Roskilde District Court that he had used an AI chatbot to research how to injure the man as badly as possible without killing him, and that he got past the system's built-in safety restrictions by claiming he was gathering material for a book. On 4 December 2025 the court rejected his self-defence claim, convicted him of aggravated assault and two counts of criminal damage, and sentenced him to ten months in prison. No source names the AI system.

AI relation under review High reported severity Criminal Charges

Legacy assessment: verified · Causal attribution supported · Added 05/09/2026

Jul 2025 to Aug 2025United StatesChatGPT

North Carolina affidavit alleges poisoning attempts and related ChatGPT research

An officer’s affidavit records a husband’s account of two alleged poisoning incidents in North Carolina. Investigators allege that the accused used ChatGPT for related research. The chatbot’s replies and their influence on the alleged conduct were not established in the retained review.

AI relation under review High reported severity Criminal Charges

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 5 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 09/08/2026

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.