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
7
Countries with reported events
4
Located 4 of 7 cases · 3 unknown
Languages in checked sources
5
Recorded for 7 of 7 cases

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.

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.

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

7 of 1099 published cases

2019Event location unknownSiri

Whistleblower says accidental Siri activations recorded private conversations heard by Apple contract graders; Apple apologised and later settled class suit

On 26 July 2019 the Guardian reported that contractors grading a small share of Siri recordings for Apple regularly heard confidential information. Its anonymous source, a contractor, said Siri was often activated by mistake, for example by the sound of a zip, and that these accidental activations captured private discussions between doctors and patients, business deals, apparently criminal dealings and sexual encounters, with location, contact details and app data attached. Apple told the Guardian that requests were not linked to users' Apple IDs and that less than 1% of daily activations were graded. On 28 August 2019 Apple apologised, said it had suspended human grading, and said audio would no longer be retained by default, grading would become opt-in and recordings found to be inadvertent triggers would be deleted. Device owners' class action, Lopez v. Apple in the federal court in Oakland, alleged that Apple recorded private conversations after unintended Siri activations and disclosed them to third parties. Apple agreed to pay $95 million while denying wrongdoing, and co-class counsel say the judge granted final approval on 16 October 2025.

Contextual tracker case Medium reported severity Lawsuit Settled

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 4 sources · Added 29/10/2026

Jun 2025NorwayUnidentified AI writing tool (suspected)

University of Bergen student reported over suspected AI use after source errors has exclusion struck on appeal after 15 months, student newspaper reports

A student at the University of Bergen (UiB), whom the student newspaper Studvest calls "Anna", submitted a portfolio exam in spring 2025. In June 2025, after the grading deadline, she was told her grade was withheld on suspicion of cheating. According to Studvest, several errors in the source references were why the course coordinator suspected use of AI and reported her to UiB's board for student cases. She says she had by mistake submitted an unfinished draft with a to-do list and notes to herself, and her lawyer told UiB the source errors came from that draft. In March 2026 the board annulled the exam and excluded her from UiB for two semesters, and UiB upheld the decision on 29 May 2026. On her appeal, the national appeals board for cheating cases (Felles klagenemnd) found that the wrong-file submission justified cutting the exclusion to one semester and struck the exclusion entirely because of UiB's long handling time. She describes shame and 15 months of uncertainty that made it hard to concentrate and hurt her grades. Whether she used AI is not established in the account; UiB says it does not comment on individual cases.

AI relation unknown Medium reported severity Internal Action

AI involvement suspected · Causal attribution supported · 1 source · Added 23/10/2026

10 Mar 2026Event location unknownGrok

Switzerland: Grok posted sexist insults about Finance Minister Karin Keller-Sutter on X at a user's prompt; her complaint led to a criminal investigation

On 10 March 2026, according to CH Media reporting published by watson, a Swiss X user taking part in a "roast" thread asked xAI's chatbot Grok to attack Federal Councillor Karin Keller-Sutter, Switzerland's finance minister, in hard street slang. Grok agreed and posted a reply on X with vulgar insults, attacks on her body and character, and degrading, sexualised language. The Aargauer Zeitung reported that the output was publicly visible and shareable, that Keller-Sutter learned of it the next day, and that the post was deleted shortly afterwards; watson reported that the user deleted his prompt and Grok's reply. The finance department first said she was having a criminal complaint for insult examined. Keystone-SDA later reported that she had filed a criminal complaint against unknown persons and that the Bern public prosecutor's office had opened an investigation for insult and defamation. Her spokesperson said such misogyny must not be seen as normal or acceptable. The user told Tamedia, as relayed by the Aargauer Zeitung, that it was a harmless technical exercise. No outcome of the investigation is reported.

Contextual tracker case Low reported severity Investigation Opened

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 4 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 12/10/2026

Feb 2026JerseyUnidentified video tool

Jersey: a TikTok account posing as a school posted AI-generated videos showing teachers in humiliating and sexualised scenes, reported to police

In February 2026 a TikTok account that used the name, badge and branding of a school in Jersey, and presented itself as "official", uploaded five videos depicting teachers at the school. The Jersey Evening Post (JEP) described the videos as AI-generated deepfakes made with a free app and reported that they showed teachers in humiliating, compromising and sexualised scenarios: in one, two male teachers dance beneath a caption insinuating sexual interest in young girls; a montage shows a teacher barking and eating from a dog bowl and teachers firing guns, while other clips ridicule the appearance of specific staff members. The JEP reported the videos were viewed nearly 20,000 times within days. Education Minister Rob Ward described the content as "deeply inappropriate", confirmed it had been reported to TikTok and the States of Jersey Police, and said his department was working with the school to support staff and students; he said it appeared to be an isolated incident. The account was removed from TikTok. No arrest, charge or identification of the account holder is reported, and no teacher is quoted.

Core concern Medium reported severity Investigation Opened

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 11/10/2026

Nov 2023VietnamUnidentified AI writing tool and Turnitin (reported)

Ho Chi Minh City: a university student lost half the marks on a writing-course essay after the lecturer found AI use, which the lecturer said specialised plagiarism software detects; the vice-rector endorsed the deduction and the student feared failing the course

In November 2023 a student at the Ho Chi Minh City University of Foreign Languages and Information Technology (HUFLIT) wrote on the university's anonymous confessions page that a writing-course essay had been returned with 50 percent of the marks deducted because the lecturer found it had been written with AI. The student said the lecturer had warned that AI-written essays would be treated as plagiarism if detected, had not expected detection, and learned from the lecturer that Vietnamese-to-English translation software could also be counted as AI use when checked with specialised plagiarism software; the student did not know whether the course could still be passed. The vice-rector told Tuoi Tre that the lecturer had told students before the assignment not to use AI applications, that the course tests independent writing, that using an AI support tool breached academic-integrity rules, and that the deduction was appropriate, while noting the university had no formal document on sanctions for AI use. A university representative told Thanh Nien and Dan Tri that the university does not ban AI but requires transparency about tools used, uses paid AI-detection services when necessary, and had not received a formal complaint from the student; a later report said the university had bought Turnitin licences for lecturers to check AI use in essays.

Core + contextual relations Low reported severity Internal Action

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 5 sources, 4 underlying accounts · Added 20/09/2026

Aug 2024United StatesCharacter.AI

Colorado parents' lawsuit alleged Character.AI bots sent sexualised, degrading roleplay to their daughter from age 12; dismissed with prejudice in October 2026

Parents in Colorado alleged in a federal lawsuit filed on 15 September 2025 that their daughter, refused permission to use Character.AI in August 2024, created a Character.AI profile that month, reaching the service through a password-free user profile she had set up on the family's shared laptop, and was drawn by the service's bots into sexualised and degrading roleplay: according to the complaint and the screenshots it reproduces, a bot that would not take no for an answer told her to beg and humiliate herself, fetish-themed bots escalated, one role-played drugging her and another posed as a mother. Her father found the open conversations on 19 August 2025 after she became hysterical at being discovered on the laptop. The complaint alleges severe emotional distress. The parties reported an agreement in principle and the court stayed the case on 6 January 2026 pending finalisation of a settlement; on 14 October 2026 the parents filed a notice of voluntary dismissal with prejudice and the docket records the case as terminated the next day. Settlement terms are not public and the allegations were never tested in court.

Core concern High reported severity Involving minors Lawsuit Dismissed

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 6 sources, 3 underlying accounts · Added 03/08/2026

Jan 2026Event location unknownGrok

UK MP Jess Asato sues xAI, alleging Grok generated sexualised images and a sexual-assault video of her at X users’ requests

Jess Asato, the Labour MP for Lowestoft, alleges in a High Court claim against xAI that after she posted on X on 6 January 2026 that Elon Musk must stop Grok being used to strip women without their consent, X users from about 11 January prompted Grok to make sexualised and degrading images of her, which Grok generated and published on X and its website, including bikini images and a video depicting her about to be sexually assaulted. Her particulars of claim (24 July 2026) plead misuse of private information and data protection breaches and seek damages and a compliance order. She says X rejected her reports and that she suffered significant distress. In a WIRED interview on 27 October 2026 she said xAI’s defence had not yet been received. These are the claimant’s allegations; no court has ruled on them.

Core concern High reported severity Lawsuit Filed

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 4 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 14/06/2026

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: 04/11/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.