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

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.

2 2024
Reported severity High
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

2 of 404 published cases

Export JSONExport CSV
19 Mar 2024 to 19 Sept 2026NetherlandsUnidentified video tool

Netherlands: the Public Prosecution Service will prosecute a 74-year-old man from Noord-Holland for making deepfake sex videos of dozens of Dutch public figures, including presenters, politicians and a member of the royal family (images of about sixty people were found on his devices), after the 2024 revelations about the MrDeepFakes platform

In March 2024 the newspaper AD revealed that a large number of Dutch women in public life, including artists, television presenters, Olympic athletes, current and former ministers, mayors and members of the royal family, appeared in manipulated pornographic videos on an online platform with 13 million monthly visitors, later identified as MrDeepFakes. Dozens of women filed police complaints and several spoke publicly: one presenter said she was preparing a complaint, a party leader said the video felt like 'digital rape', another presenter said she would file a complaint 'because tomorrow it could happen to young girls of sixteen', a presenter-entrepreneur did so 'to prevent new, young victims', and a member of parliament, told of a video by the House security service, went public rather than 'keep it small'. On 19 and 20 September 2026 AD, and the Public Prosecution Service (OM) confirming to NOS, reported that after more than a year of investigation the OM will prosecute a 74-year-old man from Noord-Holland, who is not in custody, for making the videos (Hart van Nederland, citing AD, says he is suspected of making and distributing them); images of about sixty well-known Dutch people and politicians were found on his devices, AD reported that he had been the platform's most active Dutch user, and he faces up to two years' imprisonment. The platform's Canadian operator, who removed material at the OM's request and blocked Dutch IP addresses before the site went offline, will not be prosecuted. One of the presenters reported to be among the depicted told AD she was relieved the case would go to court, having experienced the impact of such images herself. No hearing date has been set.

Core concern High reported severity Criminal Charges

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 5 sources, 3 underlying accounts · Added 21/09/2026

1 Apr 2024 to 5 Jan 2025Event location unknownUnidentified image tool

Jiangsu, China (Zhangjiagang court): a man used AI face-swap deep-synthesis to splice the faces of a person referred to as Yu and several others onto pornographic images, fabricated 'sexual' stories about them and posted the material repeatedly on overseas websites between April 2024 and January 2025; after two face-swapped nude images of Yu and Yu's ID were forwarded to Yu's work WeChat group with a fabricated claim of sex-for-money transactions, he was convicted of criminal defamation and sentenced to one year and three months (1 December 2025), upheld on appeal and listed by the Jiangsu High People's Court among its 2025 typical cases

According to the Jiangsu High People's Court's 2025 top-ten typical cases, published on 27 January 2026 and reported by The Paper, a man surnamed Wang used the deep-synthesis technology of AI software between April 2024 and January 2025 to splice the facial information of a person (pseudonym Yu) and several other people onto pornographic images, fabricated a large number of indecent images and 'sexual' topics about them, and repeatedly spread them in public posts on overseas websites. On 5 January 2025 he sent two AI face-swapped nude images bearing Yu's face and images of Yu's identity documents to a second man (dealt with separately) and fabricated the claim that he had had a sex-for-money transaction with Yu; although the second man said he would forward the material to Yu's work WeChat group, Wang did not clarify that it was false or effectively stop him, only deleting the contact. The second man forwarded the images to the WeChat group and claimed there that Yu sold sex, prompting extensive discussion inside and outside the group and, the court found, adverse effects on Yu's personal image, work and life, a serious lowering of Yu's social evaluation and a violation of Yu's dignity. The Zhangjiagang People's Court held that using deep-synthesis technology that ordinary people cannot easily identify to generate indecent images and fabricate sexual topics, spread repeatedly through information networks, was defamation of serious circumstances that seriously harmed social order; taking into account his voluntary surrender, it sentenced him on 1 December 2025 to one year and three months' imprisonment for defamation. The Suzhou Intermediate People's Court rejected his appeal. The High Court described the case as a typical example of punishing online defamation committed with AI.

Core concern High reported severity Criminal Charges

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 1 source · Added 15/06/2026

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.