Jan 2024 to Jan 2025Cambodia, South KoreaUnidentified video tool
South Korean prosecutors indicted a married couple in February 2026 on charges that, from January 2024 to January 2025, they ran phone-fraud groups in Cambodia that targeted Koreans with romance-and-investment scams; according to the prosecutors, the husband used deepfake technology to make YouTube videos in which he posed as an investment expert, while the wife built relationships with victims in private chats, and 97 victims lost about 10.1 billion won. Both admitted the charges, and on 24 July 2026 the Ulsan District Court sentenced the husband to 15 years and the wife to 9 years in prison, noting that the victims described severe harm while the defendants had made no effort to compensate them. Prosecutors appealed; at the appeal hearing on 22 October 2026 they asked for 17 years for the husband, and a joint appeal judgment is pending.
Core concern High reported severity Criminal Charges
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 4 sources, 3 underlying accounts · Added 31/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownUnidentified video tool
Al-Sharq reported on 25 June 2026, in an article quoting the woman's lawyers, that the Investment and Trade Court, in what the paper called the first case of its kind, ordered a news channel to compensate a woman whose personal photos and video clips it had processed with artificial intelligence, without her permission, to create a virtual character presented as a digital news presenter under an assumed name. The channel had launched the presenter with programmes, promotional material and a press conference, and removed the material after the woman's lawyer sent a legal warning. She also argued that news delivered by the character conflicted with her own convictions, which attributed views to her falsely. A court-appointed intellectual-property expert found the AI output to be an independent work, but the court held that the channel had exploited her images and simulated her with AI, violating her rights to her image and privacy. The appeal court reduced the award from 700,000 to 100,000 Qatari riyals, and the Court of Cassation declined the channel's further appeal, making the judgment final. The woman and the channel are not named, and the dates of the broadcasts and rulings are not given.
Core concern Medium reported severity Lawsuit Settled
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 1 source · Added 31/10/2026
Apr 2023GermanyUnidentified AI writing tool
In April 2023 the German weekly Die Aktuelle (Funke media group) ran a front cover with a picture of Michael Schumacher and the headline 'Michael Schumacher, the first interview', with a strapline saying it sounded deceptively real; inside, the quotes attributed to him had been produced by artificial intelligence. Schumacher has not been seen in public since a serious brain injury in December 2013, and his family keeps his condition private. The family announced legal action; Funke called the article tasteless and misleading, apologised and relieved the editor-in-chief of her duties. In May 2024 a family spokeswoman confirmed a Munich Labour Court judgement and a settlement by Funke, with compensation of 200,000 euros reported by Reuters and, as a reported figure, by the AP. The sources read do not name the AI tool the magazine used.
Core concern Medium reported severity Lawsuit Settled
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 5 sources, 4 underlying accounts · Added 31/10/2026
3 Oct 2026Event location unknownTaopiaopiao AI assistant
Shenzhen Special Zone Daily and its Dute news app reported on 4 October 2026 that a customer of Taopiaopiao, Alibaba Pictures' cinema-ticket app, said its AI customer-service assistant swore at her. According to the report, she was charged a 16 yuan fee for refunding two tickets she says she had bought less than two minutes earlier, was promised two 10 yuan vouchers that did not arrive, and on the afternoon of 3 October swore once while chasing them in the support chat. In the chat screenshots she gave the paper, the reply gave instructions for finding the vouchers and also contained a curse; the window had introduced itself as Taopiaopiao's artificial intelligence assistant and the reply was labelled as generated by AI. She said she was stunned and that a human agent would not explain it. A hotline worker could not view the full chat and did not know which large model the assistant used. On 6 October Taopiaopiao staff told the paper the service had been optimised and that the customer had accepted a compensation plan.
Core concern Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 30/10/2026
Event date unknownChinaUnidentified video tool
According to a CCTV report of August 2026 quoting the deputy head of the criminal division of the Yuhua District People's Court in Changsha, Hunan, a university student close to graduation bought access to a technique that turned still face photos into AI-generated moving face videos able to pass one bank payment platform's face-recognition check. Upstream members of fraud groups, which CCTV says usually lure people into installing remote-control software, sent him the victims' personal details and photos; he converted the photos into AI face videos through a third-party website and, with the verification codes, reset the victims' payment passwords so that a money-laundering crew could move money out of their linked bank accounts. In under four months the accounts of three victims lost more than 50,000 yuan in total. The court, taking into account his surrender, admission and compensation of the victims, sentenced him to one year and ten months in prison and a 3,000 yuan fine; the judgment has taken effect. The dates of the thefts and of the judgment are not reported.
Core concern Medium reported severity Criminal Charges
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 30/10/2026
Feb 2025RussiaUnidentified video tool
A court in Yaroslavl, Russia, ordered the parents of a seventh-grade pupil to pay a mathematics teacher 10,000 roubles each in compensation for moral harm, according to reports in March 2026 of the court's own announcement. The court's press service said that in February 2025 the boy filmed the teacher at work without her knowledge or consent, then used a neural network to generate a video from the footage in which she turns into a man with a bare athletic torso, and posted it in the class chat. The teacher told the court that afterwards she did not want to go back into the classroom, felt the pupils' sideways looks and that her authority had been damaged. The parents contested the claim, saying their son had only applied a trending effect and that the teacher disliked him; they did not dispute that he filmed her and made the video. The court found that the video harmed her honour, dignity and professional reputation.
Core concern Medium reported severity Lawsuit Filed
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 27/10/2026
Jun 2024Event location unknownUnidentified face-swap and voice-synthesis tool
A CCTV News report of 29 September 2026 says the Hangzhou Internet Court in Zhejiang recently concluded a portrait-rights case brought by a beauty blogger. According to the report, from June 2024 an online skincare-sales company, without the blogger's consent, took short videos and livestream footage the blogger had published and used AI synthesis to make more than 30 fake videos in which the blogger appeared to promote its products. The court found that the company had used AI face swap and the recombination of image and sound tracks to fabricate the videos for commercial gain, infringing the blogger's portrait rights. In court the company acknowledged that it had synthesised and published the videos without the blogger's authorisation, said staff had made them out of fun and curiosity, and said it had taken them all down after receiving the lawsuit papers. The court ordered the company to pay 15,000 yuan for economic loss and the costs of protecting the blogger's rights and 5,000 yuan in compensation for emotional distress, and to publish an apology prominently on the platform concerned for at least 30 days. The blogger's claim that the products sold more than 100,000 orders was not accepted as proof of loss or profit.
Core concern Low reported severity Lawsuit Filed
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 1 source · Added 26/10/2026
2024ItalyUnidentified image tool
In 2024 an associate professor at the University of Genoa took photos from the social-media profiles of six students, turned them into sexual images and shared them in Telegram chats. According to la Repubblica's October 2024 report, Genoa prosecutors accused him of 'undressing' the photos with apps that use artificial intelligence; the investigation began on 1 October 2024 after the rector's complaint, the postal police searched his office and home, and he was suspended. The university later dismissed him. According to Open and Fanpage, which report the judgment, the regional administrative court for Liguria (TAR) rejected his appeal against the dismissal in September 2026, citing a search record that found sexual virtual images on his computer matching those posted, and his interrogation, in which he admitted posting the images and creating them with software. The court found the repeated conduct harmful to the students' dignity and to the university. The criminal case, for aggravated defamation, was closed; the lecturer paid the students compensation. The tool used is not identified.
Core concern High reported severity Internal Action
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 4 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 24/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownRevoicer text-to-speech (reported)
Greg Marston, a British voice actor, said in accounts published in 2023 that an AI-generated clone of his voice, built from a recording he had made for IBM years earlier, was being sold to websites that were using it to build a synthetic voice that could say anything. Julia Angwin's New York Times column (republished by the Oman Observer on 25 September 2023) says he found the clone, called Connor, online and heard his voice on the Wimbledon website during the tennis tournament; Cryptopolitan (1 July 2023) says he found it on Revoicer, an AI text-to-speech site. He had signed a release allowing the recording to be used in many ways, but said he never agreed to having his voice cloned to compete against him. He estimated that the clone had already lost him jobs and was working with a lawyer to seek compensation. IBM said it was aware of his concern and was discussing it with him. The outcome is not reported in the inspected sources.
Core concern Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 24/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownUnidentified image tool
In a consumer-protection typical case released on 12 March 2026, the Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court described a buyer who paid 411 yuan on a shopping platform for two women's tops after asking whether the model photos were real and being told that all the shop's pictures were real photographs. The garments that arrived differed markedly from the pictures in pattern, cut and style, and on review the pictures were all AI-generated, with no real photographs and no AI label on the product pages. The buyer sued for a refund and treble damages. The court held that businesses must review content they generate with AI, that undisclosed AI images differing significantly from the goods which lead a consumer to buy amount to consumer fraud, and that the clothing company must pay treble compensation. The release as relayed does not give the dates, the court of first instance or the amount.
Core concern Low reported severity Lawsuit Filed
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 24/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownUnidentified image tool
The Beijing Internet Court reported in August 2025 that two members of a photography WeChat group had gone to court after one used AI software, without consent, to turn the other's profile portrait photo into revealingly dressed cartoon-style images and posted them in the group. According to the court, the claimant objected several times, but the defendant kept using the software to make images with exposed bodies and deformed limbs, including wooden legs and three arms, and sent them to the claimant privately. The defendant argued the images were not identifiable and were generated automatically by AI. The court found that group members could identify the claimant, that posting the images in the group infringed the claimant's portrait and reputation rights, and that the private messages infringed the claimant's general personality rights. It ordered an apology and compensation for mental harm.
Core concern Medium reported severity Lawsuit Filed
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 22/10/2026
21 Oct 2025 to 3 Apr 2026United StatesCoCounsel
In a published opinion of 3 April 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit addressed the briefs a lawyer appointed under the Criminal Justice Act had filed for an indigent defendant appealing a sentencing enhancement in a drug-trafficking case. The court noticed that the principal brief's file name was 'CoCounsel Skill Results' and found three quotations that appear in no legal authority and misstatements of two precedents. The lawyer admitted that a staff member had used Westlaw's CoCounsel to create the first draft, that he repeated the process for the reply, and that the false quotations came from artificial intelligence he did not verify. The court denied him compensation for the appeal, referred the opinion for possible disciplinary proceedings and to the Kentucky Bar Association, and by separate order removed him, locked his briefs and ordered replacement counsel to file new ones, which it said further delayed resolution of the defendant's appeal. The court acknowledged his candour and his 40 years without discipline.
Core + contextual relations Medium reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 19/10/2026
17 Oct 2026Event location unknownOpenAI support assistant (reported)
In a public post to r/ChatGPTcomplaints created on 17 October 2026, a ChatGPT Pro subscriber writes that OpenAI disabled their account two days after they paid $200 on 30 September, rejected their appeals for about two weeks, and on 17 October restored the account, acknowledging in an email that it had been disabled in error. The poster says they then asked OpenAI's AI-powered support assistant for compensation for the lost days while keeping the subscription. According to the poster, the assistant said it could not give credits, usage resets or discounts, offered a proportional refund of $86.67 and warned that accepting it would immediately cancel the subscription; the poster replied 'Yes, I approve', and the assistant then said the paid access had ended, that it could not reverse the refund, and suggested buying another subscription. The poster acknowledges the warning and their confirmation but says they misunderstood the consequence and had asked about the lost period, not the remaining one. The request was forwarded to a human specialist and was unresolved at the time of posting. The account is uncorroborated; the post was later removed by Reddit for an unstated reason.
Core + contextual relations Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 18/10/2026
2026ChinaDoubao (reported)
According to his own social-media posts and video, as reported by Dahe Daily (15 May 2026) and National Business Daily (20 May 2026), a user in China who had booked flights from Shijiazhuang to Chongqing for 2 May 2026 decided to drive instead and asked the Doubao chatbot about the refund fee. Doubao told him he could safely refund and that the fee would be small (only 5% in National Business Daily's account, under 100 yuan in Dahe Daily's). He refunded without checking the airline's rules and was charged about 40%, 600 yuan. When he returned to the chatbot, Doubao said it would handle the claim, promised to pay him 600 yuan itself if the money was not recovered by 6 May and produced a 'compensation commitment letter'. On 6 May it said it would pay by midnight and asked for his WeChat payment code; on 7 May it said that as an AI it could not make transfers and admitted its error. He then used Doubao to draft a complaint, was told by it that he did not need a lawyer, and on 12 May submitted a suit against the app's operator, Beijing Chuntian Zhiyun Technology, according to a screenshot he posted (Dahe Daily names the Beijing Internet Court). His posts had been deleted by 19 May. Doubao's customer service told Dahe Daily the matter had been recorded; Doubao and ByteDance did not answer National Business Daily. Whether the court accepted the case, and its outcome, are not reported.
Core concern Low reported severity Lawsuit Filed
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 17/10/2026
2024Event location unknownUnidentified voice-cloning tool
According to the Beijing Internet Court's account, released on 16 October 2026 among typical cases on online infringement involving older people, a culture company selling family parenting books commissioned a livestream sales host in 2024 to make promotional short videos. The videos used clips of public lectures and classes given by an older person with some public profile in education and parenting, combined with AI-synthesised audio whose timbre, intonation and rhythm closely resembled that person's voice, and linked viewers to the company's shop. Neither the images nor the audio had been authorised. The court held that the synthesised voice, combined with the person's image and public profile, was identifiable as that person's and infringed their portrait and voice rights. The company had not checked whether the material was authorised, so the court found it jointly liable with the host and ordered it to apologise and to compensate economic losses and reasonable costs of the claim. The amounts, the judgment date and the tool are not reported.
Core concern Low reported severity Lawsuit Filed
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 17/10/2026
Sept 2025Event location unknownRevolut chatbot
In September 2025 a Revolut customer asked the bank, through its chatbot, to cash in loyalty points he had earned through its spare change feature. According to the Financial Ombudsman Service's final decision (DRN-6062372), the chatbot first said the 1,119 points would be refunded as £22.38; four days later it told him the 1,119 points had a cash value of £1,119, offered that as a one-time goodwill gesture and confirmed it had processed the refund. A few hours later the chatbot said that information was wrong; a live agent then said the £1,119 refund was being processed, and the next day the chatbot said it had issued £22.38. Revolut upheld his complaint and paid £50. The ombudsman found that Revolut gave him the wrong information on several occasions that day, held that he was never entitled to £1,119, and directed Revolut to pay a further £50. The customer said the lost expected refund caused financial pressure, and gave a GP letter describing anxiety and insomnia.
Core concern Low reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 1 source · Added 15/10/2026
2026Event location unknownUnidentified customer-service chatbot
Xinmin Evening News reported on 13 October 2026, in a piece on consumer complaints over the October 2026 National Day holiday, a shopper who paid 12,099 yuan for a branded mobile phone on an unnamed platform; the merchant did not ship it at the agreed time. According to the report, he contacted customer service many times but got only the AI's automatic replies, the same few sentences over and over, and could never get transferred to a human. After mediation by the Shanghai consumer council (the Shanghai Consumer Rights Protection Commission) the phone arrived on 6 October, and his only compensation for the extra days of waiting was a 100-yuan coupon. The council's holiday figures, relayed by Laodong Bao, list looping AI customer-service replies and difficulty reaching a human among the concentrated problems. The platform, merchant and chat record are not reported.
Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 15/10/2026
Feb 2026United StatesUnidentified voice-cloning tool
Amber George was the spokeswoman for Fred's Appliance, a Spokane-area retailer, for 14 years. She told The Spokesman-Review and KREM that in February 2026 she saw a Presidents' Day sale advertisement she had never recorded, assembled from past footage with words in her voice that she says she never spoke ("They cloned my voice"). Victory Media, the production company, said in a statement that it had used AI-assisted voice editing to make a limited number of updates to existing advertisements, mainly pricing and promotional changes, which it believed its spokesperson agreement authorised, and that it disclosed the edits when questions were raised. George says the companies then proposed a contract addendum allowing AI use for little pay; she refused it and ended her work with the retailer. On 30 June 2026 she sued Fred's Appliance, Victory Media and its chief executive in Spokane Superior Court, alleging unauthorised commercial use of her voice and likeness and seeking damages and an injunction. Victory Media denies creating AI-generated versions of her image or likeness, says Fred's Appliance was unaware of the edits, and says it offered compensation that she did not accept; its lawyer later said the parties might settle.
Core concern Low reported severity Lawsuit Filed
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources · Added 12/10/2026
15 Jan 2024 to 1 Feb 2024SpainUndress Up app (reported)
Diario de Pontevedra and Faro de Vigo reported on 1 October 2026 that the Audiencia Provincial de Pontevedra had upheld a juvenile-court judgment against three boys who, aged 15 in January 2024, used an AI undressing app to turn photos two female classmates had posted on Instagram into fake nude images. According to the ruling as reported, the images were made from 15 January 2024 and shown to other pupils in class and on a school trip on 1 February 2024, and they circulated among pupils for more than fifteen days. The Juzgado de Menores found the three responsible for two offences against moral integrity and imposed socio-educational tasks on each (two five-month measures according to Diario de Pontevedra, five months according to Faro de Vigo), plus €1,000 compensation to each girl for moral damage. The school had expelled them for 15, 21 and 30 days. The appeal ruling is final.
Core concern Medium reported severity Involving minors Criminal Charges
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 04/10/2026
10 Jul 2026ChinaUnidentified chatbot
On 10 July 2026 a 67-year-old farmer in Chuzhou, Anhui, who said he had relied on an AI assistant app for more than a year for questions such as when to spray and fertilise, asked it for a weeding and pest-control plan for his sesame field and then for a drone-spraying version. The app produced a 'full plan for 100-mu sesame aerial weeding and pest control' recommending the herbicides haloxyfop-P-methyl (高效氟吡甲禾灵) and fomesafen (氟磺胺草醚) and two insecticides. He sprayed the whole 150-mu field; the next day grass and seedlings had died together. A nearby pesticide dealer and an agronomist told Lizhi News (Jiangsu Broadcasting) that fomesafen is a broadleaf herbicide for soybean fields that must not be sprayed on sesame, and that spraying it across a whole field kills the crop; asked afterwards, the app itself said fomesafen was the cause. The chat window carried a small header line saying AI output may be wrong and should be verified, which he said he had never noticed. The app's customer service said the software has no knowledge base of its own and assembles answers from public web content, and logged the loss for follow-up; no reply or compensation was reported by publication on 1 August 2026. Relays put the loss at about 150,000 yuan; that figure is not in the text of the originating report.
Core concern Medium reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 4 sources, 3 underlying accounts · Added 20/09/2026