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 is wider: it also records consequential decisions and claims about people. Each account is reviewed for publication; claims may remain uncorroborated or disputed. How we review and count cases

In this selection

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

No known event years in this selection.

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

2 of 174 published cases

Event date unknownIndiaAI face-swap or image-editing tool (not identified)

Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh: a young woman reported that an unknown person made AI deepfake images placing her face on another man's photo and sent them to her future in-laws' Instagram accounts to break off her marriage; police registered a case against unknown persons

Dainik Bhaskar reported on 19 September 2026 that a young woman in the Chaubepur police-station area of Varanasi complained that an unknown person, who had been calling her repeatedly from an unknown number, created a fake Instagram profile resembling her name, used an AI tool to place her face on another young man's photograph to produce objectionable images, and sent them to the Instagram accounts of her prospective in-laws and her prospective brother-in-law with the aim of breaking off her prospective marriage. Chaubepur police registered a case against unknown persons on the basis of a public-hearing reference (1621/26); the station in-charge said digital information about the phone number and the fake account was being gathered with cyber experts to identify and locate the accused, and that action would follow once the accused's role was clear. The report is a single local account of the complaint; the dates of the images and the complaint are not stated.

Core concern News report AI involvement: reported Causal attribution: alleged Medium reported severity Investigation Opened

Added 20/09/2026

Event date unknownUnited KingdomAI-generated video impersonating a well-known financial personality (tool not identified; personality not named by police)

Ards and North Down, Northern Ireland: a person lost £250,000 to an investment fraud that began with an AI-generated video of a well-known financial personality

On 7 September 2026 the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) said a person in the Ards and North Down area had lost £250,000 in what it called a 'sophisticated and substantial' investment fraud. The victim first saw what appeared to be an AI-generated online video featuring a well-known personality from the financial sector promoting an investment with significant returns. After investing a small amount the victim was contacted on WhatsApp and encouraged to pay more, persuaded to open multiple online accounts, to allow the fraudsters remote access to a computer 'to assist with the investment', to borrow money to keep investing, and finally to make further payments to 'release' funds supposedly held in the investment. The PSNI did not name the personality; BBC News NI noted that fabricated endorsements of financial experts such as Martin Lewis, Peter Jones and Steven Bartlett circulate online.

Core concern News report AI involvement: reported Causal attribution: supported High reported severity Investigation Opened

Added 18/09/2026

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: 22/09/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.