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
3
Countries with reported events
2
Located 2 of 3 cases · 1 unknown
Languages in checked sources
3
Recorded for 3 of 3 cases
3Core 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 2cases 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.

1 20231 2024
Reported severity MediumLow
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

3 of 628 published cases

Export JSONExport CSV
2024United StatesUnidentified voice-cloning tool (suspected)

Florida: judge suspended for sharing, as a 2024 candidate, a fabricated call of justices the judicial watchdog says was likely computer-manipulated or AI-made

While campaigning in 2024 for a Broward County court seat, Lauren Peffer, now a county judge, sought the endorsement of the South Florida Sun Sentinel editorial board. Asked to back her claim of an image crisis in Florida's judiciary, she cited a self-published book by a fired employee of the Ninth Judicial Circuit and supplied a recording purportedly of a phone call about the book between Chief Justice Carlos Muñiz, Justice Renatha Francis and the circuit's chief judge, Lisa Munyon. The Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission's notice of formal charges, filed in May 2025, said the recording was fabricated, likely using computer manipulation or generative AI, and that while the voices resembled those of the participants, the manner of speech, tone and much of the content were objectively unrealistic. The notice said she had shared it despite clear evidence of its inauthenticity and had perpetuated a false perception of illegal, unethical or immoral conduct by the justices, a chief judge and others in the judicial branch. Peffer apologised, said the content was created by a third party with whom she had no ties, and testified that she could not explain why she had thought it valid. According to Bloomberg Law, the Florida Supreme Court on 9 October 2026 suspended her for 30 days and fined her $10,000, saying her conduct undermined public confidence in the judiciary by implicating sitting justices; the two justices whose voices were faked recused. Who made the recording, and with what tool, is not reported.

Core concern Low reported severity Regulatory Action

AI involvement suspected · Causal attribution alleged · 6 sources · Added 12/10/2026

10 Sept 2023Event location unknownUnidentified image tool

Sevilla court: three men convicted of making AI nude images of three former schoolmates from Instagram photos and sharing them; nine months, firm 1 Oct 2026

A judge of the criminal section of the Tribunal de Instancia de Sevilla convicted three men on 1 October 2026, by a conformity agreement, of three offences against moral integrity with the gender aggravating factor. The court found proven that the three, acting with a minor, took photographs from the open Instagram profiles of three young women who had been their schoolmates, manipulated them with an AI application on Telegram to simulate, with great realism, the women's fully naked bodies, and shared the files in a WhatsApp group and a Discord group, after which they spread further; an unidentified person sent the manipulated images of all three to one of the women's Instagram profiles at about 00:30 on 10 September 2023. Each man received nine months in prison, suspended for two years on condition of no new offence, a ban on Telegram, WhatsApp, Instagram and Discord for three years and nine months and a sex-education programme; they paid the moral damages fixed by the court in full. The judiciary's Andalusian communication office published the sentence on 8 October 2026 and described it as the first conviction in Sevilla for this use of AI. The account rests on that official communication and on press reports relaying it; the judgment itself was not inspected.

Core concern Medium reported severity Criminal Charges

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 4 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 09/10/2026

Event date unknownIndiaUnidentified image tool

Sonbhadra (Uttar Pradesh): police say a retired official was pressured into transferring about Rs 2.36 crore over one to one-and-a-half months by extortionists who posed as judicial and government officials and used AI-made fake nude images to threaten him; three arrested after a bank manager's alert (September 2026)

Sonbhadra police say a retired official in Uttar Pradesh transferred about Rs 2.36 crore into accounts named by extortionists, including money raised through a loan, before a State Bank of India manager noticed the repeated transfers on 22 September 2026 and alerted the cyber crime police station. At a press briefing on 25 September the superintendent of police said the fraudsters had frightened the man by invoking the higher judiciary and senior government officials (a so-called digital arrest) and had used AI to create fake obscene or nude images to blackmail him with threats of defamation and harm to his family (Times of India, Amar Ujala, ETV Bharat, Newstrack). Police froze about Rs 75 lakh, registered an FIR and arrested three people, including the alleged organiser; the outlets relay one police account, and they describe the AI element differently (images of the victim, or images sent to him during a WhatsApp chat with someone posing as a woman).

Core concern High reported severity Investigation Opened

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 4 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 27/09/2026

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: 12/10/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.