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
2
Countries with reported events
2
Located 2 of 2 cases · 0 unknown
Languages in checked sources
3
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 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.

2 2025
Reported severity Medium
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

2 of 553 published cases

Export JSONExport CSV
Jun 2025FranceUnidentified image and video tool

Pont-à-Mousson pensioner lost her savings to a fraudulent investment platform promoted by an ad reported as AI-generated likenesses of Macron and Arnault

A retired woman in her eighties living in Pont-à-Mousson (Meurthe-et-Moselle, France) responded in summer 2025 to an online advertisement in which AI-generated likenesses of Emmanuel Macron and Bernard Arnault promoted a lucrative investment platform. A supposed financial adviser then called her, she invested 5,000 euros, received several hundred euros of 'interest', and reinvested repeatedly until the advertisement and the site disappeared. L'Est Républicain (7 June 2026) and Capital put the loss at 10,000 euros; Le Parisien, citing ICI and L'Est Républicain, reports 25,000 euros, all her savings. The Pont-à-Mousson police station says an investigation was opened and that it receives three to five complaints a week for this kind of fraud. The account rests on the police station's warning as reported by the regional press, which describes the advertisement as AI-generated; the advertisement itself was not examined by the outlets and the quoted police statements do not mention AI.

Core concern Medium reported severity Investigation Opened

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 4 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 07/10/2026

25 Oct 2025IndiaUnidentified video tool

Hyderabad, India: actor Chiranjeevi files a cybercrime complaint over AI-generated obscene videos using his face on pornographic websites; police register a case under the IT Act and BNS

On 25 October 2025 the Telugu actor and former Union minister Konidela Chiranjeevi gave Hyderabad cybercrime police a written complaint that several pornographic websites were publishing obscene videos made with AI that morphed his face and likeness, and asked for a criminal and technical investigation and removal of the content, including from mirror sites. Police registered a case under Sections 67 and 67A of the IT Act, several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act. In the complaint he said the videos caused severe and irreparable harm to his reputation and personal and emotional distress to him and his family. He had already obtained an ad-interim injunction from the Hyderabad City Civil Court protecting his name, image and likeness (Gulf News); V6 Velugu reports that he had gone to that court in September 2025 over the same kind of deepfake videos and that on 26 September it ordered their removal. A September 2026 NewsX recap reports that Hyderabad Police Commissioner V C Sajjanar said the cybercrime team was working to trace those responsible.

Core concern Medium reported severity Investigation Opened

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 5 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 29/09/2026

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: 08/10/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.