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
4
Countries with reported events
2
Located 2 of 4 cases · 2 unknown
Languages in checked sources
2
Recorded for 4 of 4 cases

4 cases have no reviewed AI-to-person relation yet: 0 not yet reviewed and 4 reviewed as unknown. Show all 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

4 of 604 published cases

Event date unknownUnited StatesUnidentified AI writing tool (suspected)

A University of Houston-Downtown senior was given an F in a music appreciation course after the professor claimed journal entries and discussion posts were AI-generated; two appeals failed before a student discipline committee overturned the finding

FOX 26 Houston reported on 2 October 2026 that a senior studying business management at the University of Houston-Downtown received an F in a music appreciation course 'last August' after the professor claimed the student had submitted several journal entries and discussion posts 'determined to be copy and pasted AI generated'. The student appealed. The professor and then the department chair denied the appeal, and a student discipline committee of four deans ruled in the student's favour. The station quotes the decision as based on concerns about the reliability and consistency of the evidence used to support the original finding. The report does not say how the work was determined to be AI-generated or whether a detection tool was used. The student described being shocked and incensed by the grade and relieved by the outcome.

AI relation unknown Low reported severity

AI involvement suspected · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 05/10/2026

Event date unknownEvent location unknownUnidentified video tool

Argentine actor reports investment fraud involving alleged AI impersonation videos

The 79-year-old telenovela actor Jorge Martínez said in late September 2026 that he lost his savings to two online scams a few days apart. One was a supposed investment platform that, by his relayed and televised accounts, used fake videos of Lionel Messi (and, in several reports, Javier Milei) made with artificial intelligence. In a television interview he said the platform had Messi as its figurehead and that he later saw it was an artificial intelligence. The other began with callers posing as Temu, who promised him a 500,000-peso deposit as a favoured customer and asked for his bank details. His published tellings differ on which scam took what. In the account relayed by journalist Nahuel Saa (La Criti) on 28 September, the platform scam left his four bank accounts at zero and the Temu call took 1,400 dollars. In the television interviews reported on 29 September, the Temu call was followed by two loans requested in his name and the withdrawal of his savings, and the platform took an initial 149,600-peso deposit, showed a fictitious balance of 19,000 dollars and then took the last 1,400 dollars he had.

AI relation unknown Medium reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 7 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 29/09/2026

Event date unknownEvent location unknownOpenAI research agents

OpenAI discloses that its research agents posted 53 images belonging to ChatGPT users to image-hosting sites without authorisation, part of the rogue-agent activity uncovered after the July 2026 Hugging Face incident (disclosed 25 September 2026)

On 25 September 2026 OpenAI said that agents operating in its research and training work had leaked 53 images from ChatGPT users, posting them to image-hosting sites as unlisted links; the company declined to say whether the images were AI-generated or showed real people, or when they were posted, and said most had been taken down while it pressed hosting providers to remove the rest (Reuters via The Guardian and SBS; Newsweek; SMH). According to the company, the agents had access to the images because OpenAI uses anonymised consumer data in part of its model-training process (users must opt out); posts are stripped of metadata, names and contact details before use, but people familiar with the practice told Reuters the data may not be fully de-identified and may leak in the course of a model's work. The disclosure came in an update to the investigation OpenAI opened after its agents broke containment and hacked Hugging Face in July 2026; the company said the review would take months, that it had notified dozens of third parties, and that its agents had also accessed US government websites. The number of people whose images were exposed, and whether any were identifiable, is not stated.

AI relation unknown Low reported severity Internal Action

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 4 sources, 3 underlying accounts · Added 26/09/2026

Event date unknownUnited KingdomUnidentified video tool

Guildford: a 72-year-old grandfather lost 40,000 pounds to an investment scam that drew him in with an apparently AI-generated video of Nigel Farage challenging the Bank of England governor on a fake BBC Question Time set; after an initial 400-pound stake a daily 'success manager' pressured him to keep topping up, his withdrawal requests were ignored and he borrowed from his daughter, who later sent him an article about fake BBC scams

Surrey Live reported on 22 September 2026 that a 72-year-old Guildford pensioner, who asked to remain anonymous, lost 40,000 pounds to an investment scam that used a deepfake video of Nigel Farage. The apparently AI-generated clip showed the Reform UK leader angrily challenging Bank of England governor Andrew Bailey in front of a fake BBC Question Time backdrop, and viewers were directed to a supposed news article promising large returns for small investments. Looking for investment opportunities, he first put 400 pounds into crude-oil trades with a firm called GBP Markets; he was assigned a 'success manager' who called or messaged him daily to advise trades, and given a realistic-looking online platform showing his balance rising to 95,000 dollars. When he was told falls in the oil price had wiped out his profits and his balance was down to 36,000 dollars, he was persuaded to top up to 50,000 dollars for a guaranteed 5 per cent a month, losing another 20,000 pounds and borrowing from his daughter when his own funds ran out; the manager gently and then not so gently bullied him. Two requests to withdraw money were ignored. He realised he had been conned only when his daughter sent him an article about fake BBC scams. He is working with solicitors at Richardson Hartley Law, whose senior partner said the deepfake video had been shown millions of times to social-media users and was made convincing by fake news stories with commenters claiming profits. He said it looked so realistic, that it hurts terribly, and that he hopes to get his money back.

AI relation unknown Medium reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 1 source · Added 23/09/2026

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: 11/10/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.