Skip to main content

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

In this selection

Published cases
8
Countries with reported events
5
Located 7 of 8 cases · 1 unknown
Languages in checked sources
4
Recorded for 8 of 8 cases

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

Response counts currently use each case’s principal recorded outcome. Further proceedings may be described in its account.

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.

No known event years in this selection.

More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

8 of 868 published cases

Event date unknownRussiaUnidentified legal research tool

Russian intellectual property court fined an Udmurtia entrepreneur 5,000 roubles over non-existent case law he said an AI service selected, reports say

Russia's Court for Intellectual Property Rights fined an individual entrepreneur from Udmurtia 5,000 roubles for contempt of court after finding that part of the 12 references to case law in his cassation appeal, including one said to be a Supreme Court position, pointed to court acts that do not exist or attributed conclusions to them, the court's press service told RIA Novosti on 27 August 2026. Rossiyskaya Gazeta reports that the entrepreneur explained he had prepared the appeal with an AI-based service that selected the case law, and that his side argued he had no legal education and could not check the references; the court rejected the argument that the errors were technical. The date of the ruling and the AI service are not reported.

Core + contextual relations Low reported severity Regulatory Action

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources · Added 23/10/2026

Event date unknownAustraliaUnidentified AI tool

KPMG Australia fined a partner more than A$10,000 for uploading course material to an AI tool to answer an internal AI training exam, reports say

A partner at KPMG Australia, who is also a registered company auditor, was fined more than A$10,000 of future income after uploading a training course's reference manual into an AI tool to answer a question in the firm's internal exam on AI, the Australian Financial Review reported on 15 February 2026; other outlets relaying it say the partner was also made to redo the test. According to those reports, the partner completed the mandatory AI training in July, the firm's monitoring detected the AI use in August, and an internal investigation decided the fine; the reports do not state the year of the training or the detection. The partner self-reported to Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand (CA ANZ), which is investigating. KPMG said more than two dozen staff had been caught using AI in internal exams since July. The partner is not named.

Core concern Low reported severity Internal Action

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 6 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 23/10/2026

Event date unknownChinaUnidentified video tool

Hangzhou: man who sold AI face-swap obscene videos, including custom swaps of private people's faces, jailed 7 years 3 months; court orders 60,000 yuan

According to Hangzhou prosecutors and courts as reported by CCTV and relayed by Xinhua in March 2024, police in Xiaoshan district opened a case in August 2022 after finding that a local man was spreading large numbers of obscene videos made with AI technology. Prosecutors said he used AI face-swap software to put faces onto obscene videos, spread them in paid social-media groups to attract customers, sold the software and tutorials, and took custom orders, swapping in the faces of public figures and of private people; one customer asked for the face of a woman he had a crush on. Victims included several well-known public figures and many unspecified private people. In a civil public-interest suit brought by prosecutors, the Hangzhou Internet Court ordered him to delete the personal information he had obtained, apologise publicly and pay 60,000 yuan for personal-information protection. In November 2023 the Xiaoshan District People's Court sentenced him to seven years and three months in prison and a 60,000-yuan fine for making and spreading obscene material for profit.

Core concern High reported severity Criminal Charges

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 22/10/2026

Event date unknownEstoniaUnidentified AI writing tool

Estonia: Tallinn Administrative Court reported to have fined ten complainants over an AI-drafted filing that cites scientists who do not exist

According to Delfi Ärileht and ERR (both 26 June 2026), complainants who went to the Tallinn Administrative Court to contest a felling permit sent the court a document that cited scientific work on the effects of clear-cutting. The court found that the Estonian scientists named in the references do not exist and that the studies could not be found. It asked how the document had been produced, gave the complainants the chance to submit the cited works, and warned of a fine for attempting to mislead the court. The complainants replied that using AI is not forbidden and that they had not meant to mislead the court. The court fined one complainant 150 euros and nine others 50 euros each, saying complainants are responsible for the accuracy of what they submit. Delfi Ärileht reports that the Tallinn Circuit Court agreed and that the Supreme Court declined the case that week, so the fines are in force. No report names the tool or says which complainant used it.

Core concern Low reported severity Regulatory Action

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 05/10/2026

Event date unknownAustraliaUnidentified image tool

Western Australia: a 41-year-old Wanneroo man was jailed for four and a half years after pleading guilty to 26 charges including producing and possessing child exploitation material; the District Court judge said he had manipulated images of real victims with AI tools, and ABC News reports he used AI on images of children from social media

ABC News (2 October 2026) reports that WA District Court Judge Belinda Lonsdale sentenced a 41-year-old man to four and a half years in prison, with eligibility for parole after two and a half years, for creating child exploitation material with AI. He had pleaded guilty to 26 charges including indecent recording and producing, creating and possessing child exploitation material, and to five charges of possessing indecent or obscene articles, and was fined $2,500 for the offensive material charges. The judge said he was guilty of incorporating images of real victims and manipulating their images using AI tools, and that the claim that AI-generated material involved no actual abuse was not mitigating because images of real children were used; ABC reports he used AI to manipulate images of children from social media. He sent sexual material through encrypted messaging apps to two co-accused and to a covert police operative, and a police raid on his Wanneroo home found a large amount of child exploitation material. The children are not identified and their number is not reported.

Core concern High reported severity Involving minors Criminal Charges

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 1 source · Added 02/10/2026

Event date unknownUnited StatesUnidentified AI search answer

Southeast Idaho waterfowl hunter reportedly found hunting a day before the season opened after an AI search answer gave the opening date

The Spokesman-Review reported on 24 October 2025 that an Idaho Fish and Game spokesperson said a waterfowl hunter in southeast Idaho was caught hunting a day early. According to the spokesperson, the hunter told wardens the opening date came from an online search, and wardens found the search returned an AI answer built from a failed proposal instead of the agency's final decision. As context, Idaho Fish and Game had published a warning on 15 October 2025 stating that conservation officers encounter people using AI and search engines and getting incorrect information, which has led to citations. Wyoming Game and Fish published a notice on 22 October 2025 that AI-generated search results were citing failed bills as current law. The sources do not state whether this hunter was cited, the penalty, the date of the event, or which AI product produced the answer.

Core concern Low reported severity

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 29/09/2026

Event date unknownAustraliaChatGPT (reported)

Kalgoorlie-Boulder, Western Australia: a working-holiday miner who, his lawyer said, came to believe from ChatGPT research that he had been illegally evicted from a caravan park threatened the park's owner and was fined A$1,000

A 21-year-old French national working as an underground miner in Kalgoorlie-Boulder on a working holiday visa pleaded guilty in Kalgoorlie Magistrates Court to making a threat to unlawfully do an act. The prosecutor said he saw the owner of the caravan park where he had stayed in a supermarket, waited outside, called him over for a fight in the car park and, when the owner declined, told him 'I really want to f… you up' and 'if I see you, I'll f… you up'. The owner and his wife drove to Kalgoorlie police station to report it. His defence lawyer told the court that he had been locked out of the park without his belongings, had done research using ChatGPT and came to believe that he had been unfairly and illegally evicted. The magistrate called the behaviour 'absolutely appalling', fined him A$1,000 and granted a spent conviction. The court was told the matter could make his application for permanent residency in Australia difficult. ChatGPT's replies are not published, and the AI connection rests on the defence submission as reported by one newsroom.

Core concern Low reported severity Criminal Charges

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 29/09/2026

Event date unknownEvent location unknownChatGPT

Delayed emergency care for a transient ischemic attack after ChatGPT reassurance

A 63-year-old man who developed repeated, self-limiting episodes of double vision four days after a catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation asked ChatGPT (GPT-3.5) whether visual disturbance was possible after the procedure. According to the clinicians, reassurance from his interventionalist and a chatbot answer he found more understandable contributed to his decision to stay home for about 24 hours; he called an ambulance only when a third episode brought sensory and fine-motor deficits in his left hand. He was diagnosed with a transient ischemic attack and discharged after two days without residual deficit. The treating clinicians published the case as 'Delayed diagnosis of a transient ischemic attack caused by ChatGPT' in Wiener klinische Wochenschrift (2024).

AI relation under review Low reported severity Media Coverage

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

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: 23/10/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.