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
1
Located 1 of 2 cases · 1 unknown
Languages in checked sources
2
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.

1cases with a recorded lawsuit outcome 0cases 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

0 cases 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 20251 2026
Reported severity MediumLow
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

2 of 1005 published cases

Export JSONExport CSV
17 Jul 2025United StatesMicrosoft Copilot (reported)

Madison newspaper reporter fired after story ran with invented quotes the paper blamed on unauthorized AI use; she says company-installed Copilot added them

On 13 July 2025 the Wisconsin State Journal in Madison, Wisconsin, published on its front page a reporter's story about redevelopment proposals for a downtown block. It quoted the co-owner of a cafe that does not exist and described proposal features that the developer says were not in its proposal. The paper removed the story and on 17 July published a re-reported version with an editor's note saying the original contained incorrect information and quotes created by an unauthorized use of AI. The reporter, who had been with the paper for a couple of months, told Isthmus that she ran her finished draft through the AI program the company had installed on her work computer, Microsoft Copilot, which she believed was approved for checking copy, and that the AI-edited version contained the invented quote. She says she was fired by phone the day the re-reported story ran, without a formal investigation, and later lost her health insurance and has had little luck finding another job. She takes full responsibility for the errors and also points to rushed editing and the absence of an AI policy or training. The paper said it does not comment on personnel matters.

Core concern Medium reported severity Internal Action

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources · Added 29/10/2026

Feb 2026Event location unknownUnidentified image tool

Brasília appeals court upholds 20,000-reais damages against a federal deputy for an AI-made image placing Bolsonaro in a nonexistent scene

In February 2026 federal deputy Rogério Correia posted on X a realistic image produced with artificial intelligence that, according to the Federal District court, inserted former president Jair Bolsonaro into a nonexistent scene and linked him to the banker Daniel Vorcaro, Banco Master and an alleged illicit scheme. Bolsonaro sued; a first-instance court ordered the deputy in May 2026 to pay 20,000 reais in moral damages and publish a retraction. On 8 October 2026 the First Civil Panel of the Federal District and Territories Court of Justice (TJDFT) unanimously dismissed the deputy's appeal, holding that parliamentary immunity does not cover a realistic AI image of a nonexistent event presented without a clear warning, and that the association harmed Bolsonaro's honour and image. The judgment was made public on 20 October 2026.

Core concern Low reported severity Lawsuit Ongoing

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 22/10/2026

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: 29/10/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.