6 Aug 2025United StatesUnidentified video tool
On Wednesday 6 August 2025 the NewsNation host Chris Cuomo shared on social media a video that showed a fake Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez arguing on the floor of Congress that a Sydney Sweeney jeans advert was racist, and added his own criticism of her party. The Guardian reports that the clip was prominently watermarked as a deepfake made using AI technology, and The Independent reports a watermark reading parody 100% made with AI. Ocasio-Cortez replied that it was a deepfake and told him to use his critical thinking skills. Cuomo deleted the post and acknowledged it was a deepfake, but continued to criticise her, including on air. The Independent reports that other commentators also took the video as real and attacked her. The maker of the video and the tool used are not identified.
Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources · Added 27/10/2026
Event date unknownUnited StatesUnidentified image and video tool
The Monitor (MyRGV) reports, citing a probable cause affidavit, that a Texas Department of Public Safety staff sergeant was arrested on 3 March 2025 on a charge of possession or promotion of child pornography after his wife handed investigators a hard drive she had found. According to the affidavit, the drive held images of girls under 18 with their genitals exposed that "had been deepfake", and a Texas Rangers investigator said it also held sexually explicit videos and pictures of current female DPS employees' faces modified using an artificial intelligence application. DPS suspended him with pay and opened an administrative investigation; he was released on a $300,000 bond. He is presumed innocent, and no later outcome was found.
Core concern High reported severity Involving minors Criminal Charges
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources · Added 24/10/2026
2026United StatesChatGPT
In a 2026 Texas trial over 3M's role in the January 2020 Watson Grinding explosion in Houston, which killed three people, an engineering expert retained for 3M used ChatGPT to prepare his expert report, according to discovery records and transcripts reviewed by 404 Media and CBS News. One prompt asked ChatGPT to show how 3M was 0% at fault for the explosion. The plaintiffs' lawyers, who found a citation overlay document and then hundreds of pages of prompts, said ChatGPT produced more than 80% of the report. Under questioning, the expert acknowledged using AI to help draft the report but defended his research. CBS News reports that after the deposition 3M's attorneys removed him from their witness list, and the plaintiffs subpoenaed him to testify about his prompts at trial. The expert's lawyer said he did not delegate his opinions to ChatGPT and called public characterisations a selective distortion of the record; 3M said he was an independent witness who used AI as a tool after reaching his own conclusions. The jury found 3M negligent and the court awarded the victims $61.5 million; 3M said it would appeal.
Core concern Low reported severity Internal Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 17/10/2026
31 Mar 2026 to 11 Sept 2026United StatesIrys (reported)
A Los Angeles County Superior Court judge ordered a senior associate at Musick, Peeler & Garrett, the outside firm defending State Farm in a homeowner's lawsuit over a fire-damaged home, to pay a $999.99 sanction after the associate's motions in limine cited cases, quotations and holdings that did not exist, Law360 reported on 14 September 2026. In a declaration reproduced by Reason's Volokh Conspiracy, the associate said she used an AI program called Irys to prepare the motions, did not check some of the citations, and wrongly believed the program was cite-checked through the firm's Westlaw subscription; she confirmed seven non-existent case citations across eight motions. The plaintiff's lawyers found the citations and raised them at a status conference on 7 August 2026. The firm acknowledged citations that appeared to be AI hallucinations, and its lead trial counsel apologised to the court and the plaintiff. According to Law360, the judge had considered up to $5,000, and the amount set is one cent below the level at which California law requires a court to notify the State Bar.
Core concern Low reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 4 sources · Added 17/10/2026
21 Nov 2025United StatesUnidentified AI drafting tool
On 25 September 2026 a judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts granted a defence motion for sanctions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 against a California-barred lawyer admitted for one case (pro hac vice) to represent the plaintiff. The court found that an opposition the lawyer filed on 21 November 2025 was replete with inaccurate citations, including a quotation attributed to a case with a fictitious Westlaw citation, and that later oppositions cited a non-existent case. In response to the court's order to show cause, the lawyer admitted using AI to draft the first opposition and explained a belief that the enterprise-level AI software in use did not hallucinate cases. The court revoked the lawyer's pro hac vice admission and ordered the lawyer's firm to pay the defendants' reasonable fees and costs, capped at $10,000. The order does not name the AI product.
Core concern Medium reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 1 source · Added 16/10/2026
Event date unknownUnited StatesArtSpace.ai (reported)
According to court documents reported by FOX59, an Indianapolis photographer uploaded photos he had taken, and images found on social media, to the AI image platform ArtSpace.ai and typed prompts asking it to remove the clothing of the people shown while leaving the rest of each photo unchanged. Police traced a May cyber tip that flagged 1,631 suspected child sexual abuse files on the platform to his IP address. Investigators say the photos he uploaded showed at least 47 children, some as young as four or five, and that he told police he knew several of the victims. After a forensic review found more AI-generated files and further juvenile victims, he faces 48 counts of child exploitation and two of possession of child sex abuse material. The charges are untried; a jury trial is scheduled for November 2026.
Core concern High reported severity Involving minors Criminal Charges
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 16/10/2026
5 Feb 2026 to 9 Oct 2026United StatesvLex, Paxton AI and NotebookLM (reported)
In a federal trademark suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, the court on 5 February 2026 struck a company defendant's motion papers and entered default judgment against it as a sanction on its lawyer, after his filings repeatedly cited nonexistent cases and misattributed quotations. The lawyer said he had found and cite-checked cases with AI tools (vLex and Paxton AI) and used NotebookLM to review a later submission; the court rejected his explanations and found he acted in bad faith. On 9 October 2026 the court described the citations as produced by generative AI and ordered the lawyer to pay $38,877.59 in fees and costs to the firm of a co-defendant's former lawyer, who had reported the false citations to the court.
Core + contextual relations Medium reported severity
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 16/10/2026
31 Jan 2025 to 12 Dec 2025United StatesUnidentified AI drafting tool
On 12 December 2025 the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon dismissed with prejudice the claims of plaintiffs in a family dispute over their late mother's estate and family property, as a sanction for what the court called their misuse of generative artificial intelligence, and found their continual violations of the court's Local Rules an additional basis for the dismissal. Three of the plaintiffs' summary-judgment briefs cited fifteen nonexistent cases and fabricated quotations attributed to eight real authorities. The plaintiffs had said the inaccurate citations came from reliance on an automated legal citation tool. The court found that the plaintiffs shared responsibility with their lead lawyer and that one plaintiff, a frequent self-represented litigant, was likely the person who used AI to draft the briefs. It struck the briefs, ordered the lead lawyer to pay $15,500 to the court and awarded the defendants their fees. In March 2026 it set those fees at $94,704.38, ordering the lead lawyer to pay 85% and local counsel 15%. In June 2026 it denied the plaintiffs' motion to reconsider a later ruling for the defendants on a counterclaim.
Core + contextual relations Medium reported severity Lawsuit Dismissed
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 15/10/2026
Event date unknownUnited StatesUnidentified image tool
The Parker County Sheriff's Office in Texas says a juvenile confessed to taking photographs of a younger child and using AI to alter them so that the child appeared nude, and that evidence from the teenager's devices and TikTok account showed photos of at least three other juvenile victims were transformed the same way and uploaded to TikTok. The case began with a July tip from TikTok to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. The sheriff's office says all victims were identified and their families notified. The teenager faces felony charges, including possession of child pornography, and awaits juvenile court proceedings; the account is the sheriff's office's, relayed by CBS Texas and FOX 4 on 14 October 2026, and the charges are untried.
Core concern High reported severity Involving minors Criminal Charges
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 15/10/2026
24 Apr 2026United StatesUnidentified AI research tool
On 24 April 2026 the Supreme Court of Alabama dismissed an appeal by two siblings in a family dispute over living trusts because their lawyer, W. Perry Hall, had filed briefs in which most of the legal authorities were misquoted or did not exist. The court said they appeared to be AI hallucinations, and at a show-cause hearing in February 2026 Hall admitted that many authorities did not exist and that he had improperly used AI to obtain them. The court ordered Hall to pay the opposing party's fees and costs of $17,200 and double appeal costs, barred him from filing in the court without a co-signing attorney and referred him to the Alabama State Bar. It said the dismissal was imposed as a sanction because of the particularly egregious facts. One justice, concurring in part and dissenting in part, objected to dismissing the appeal as a sanction for the lawyer's conduct but would have affirmed the judgment against the clients on the merits.
Core + contextual relations Medium reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 1 source · Added 14/10/2026
Jun 2025 to Jul 2025Event location unknownUnidentified voice-cloning tool
A State Department cable dated 3 July 2025, sent to all US embassies and consulates and reported by The Washington Post, AP and The Guardian, said an impostor posing as Secretary of State Marco Rubio had contacted at least five senior officials, including three foreign ministers and a US governor, by text, Signal and voicemail, with the aim of gaining access to information or accounts. According to AP, two senior officials and the cable described the attempts as using technology driven by artificial intelligence; the Guardian reports that the messages mimicked Rubio's voice and writing style. The department said it was investigating and advised all employees and foreign governments. One official told AP the attempts had been unsuccessful; the technical basis for the AI description was not disclosed.
Core concern Low reported severity Investigation Opened
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 14/10/2026
3 Jun 2026United StatesUnidentified AI tool
On 3 June 2026 the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit fined immigration attorneys Mike Singh Sethi and William Rounds $2,500 each and suspended both from practice before the court for six months. Briefs filed in an asylum petition for review cited two cases that do not exist and attributed quotations to opinions that do not contain them. In a motion to correct, the attorneys called the errors typographical, and at oral argument Rounds twice said AI was not used. In their response to the court's order to show cause, they conceded that the errors were probably the product of unauthorised AI use by the firm's unlicensed brief writers and a failure to check citations. The court said the suspension was owed to their repeated failure of candour. The Board of Immigration Appeals then suspended Sethi from practice before the Board, the immigration courts and the Department of Homeland Security for six months, effective 13 June 2026, and designated that decision as a precedent on 1 October 2026.
Contextual tracker case Medium reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 2 sources · Added 14/10/2026
Event date unknownUnited StatesUnidentified image tool
County 17 reports, citing an affidavit filed on 7 October 2026 in Campbell County District Court, that investigators examining a Gillette man's cellphone found an AI-generated explicit image of a minor. According to the affidavit, the original was a back-to-school photo that the child's mother had sent to the man in August 2025, and it had been altered using an AI application to make the child appear nude. The phone also reportedly held an advertisement for an AI pornography application. The man, arrested on 20 June on separate charges of sexual abuse of a minor, faces four counts of sexual exploitation of children; he is presumed innocent. The report does not say who altered the photo, when, with which application, or whether the image was shared.
Core concern High reported severity Involving minors Criminal Charges
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 13/10/2026
Sept 2026United StatesUnidentified image tool
The Stanford Review reported on 21 September 2026 that Stanford's Residential & Dining Enterprises (R&DE) had used AI to change the appearance of students in its advertising: a student was sent images comparing a banner with the original photograph, which he recalled a Stanford photographer taking, and found he had been removed and replaced by an AI-generated Black woman, while the two students beside him were made to appear visibly thinner. Stanford confirmed to The Stanford Daily on 23 September that R&DE used generative AI to modify the appearance of several students in the image; the Daily reported that the students' clothing was changed into Stanford merchandise, two students' faces were slimmed and one student's race, gender and appearance were entirely changed, and the university said the alteration and its non-disclosure violated its policy prohibiting AI in producing or altering images of Stanford people; the banner at the Governor's Corner housing centre was taken down and staff training promised. On 24 September NBC News reported the university's statement that the alteration was 'a serious error in judgment', that it had apologised to the students whose images were altered or erased, and that it had opened an investigation. The replaced student, who first found the edit funny, said that seeing his identity changed and being left out made him feel 'silenced and erased from a representation that was supposed to include me', that it was upsetting, and that he was exhausted by the national media attention. According to the student, the original photograph was taken at a 2024 Lunar New Year dinner in a campus dining hall and had been used unaltered in earlier promotional material.
Core concern Low reported severity Internal Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 4 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 25/09/2026
Aug 2017United StatesDraftKings and FanDuel apps
Christopher Evans (Philadelphia; complaint filed 24 July 2026 in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas) and Michael Santos (Coatesville, Chester County; complaint filed 29 July 2026 in the Chester County Court of Common Pleas) sued DraftKings and its Pennsylvania affiliate; Santos also sued FanDuel and its parents. Both product-liability complaints, filed by the same law firm, allege that the defendants' sports-betting, daily-fantasy and casino apps are designed to addict, and that the companies 'utilize the combination of advanced technology and artificial intelligence paired with the tracking of personalized user data to intentionally addict users', operating 'AI-powered engagement platforms' (pleaded on information and belief) and, per DraftKings' 10-K as quoted, 'data science and machine learning' recommendation engines. Evans pleads that since about August 2017 he wagered over US$2.1 million with net losses of about US$81,000, received constant targeted promotions and personalised push notifications and a VIP account manager, developed depression and anxiety and was formally diagnosed with depression in 2020, stopped going outside, fell into debt, had his vehicle repossessed and separated from his wife. Santos pleads over US$1.164 million wagered on DraftKings with net losses of about US$58,000 plus small FanDuel losses, targeted advertising and a VIP manager who kept offering bonus bets after he said he wanted to stop, maxed-out credit cards, the forced sale of his house, diagnoses of depression and anxiety, suicidal ideation, and self-exclusion with the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board in 2023. Both cases were removed to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on 16 September 2026 (2:26-cv-07168 and 2:26-cv-07176). The allegations are untested.
Contextual tracker case High reported severity Lawsuit Ongoing
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 4 sources · Added 20/09/2026
19 May 2026United StatesUnidentified voice-cloning tool (suspected)
A married couple in their sixties buying a US$460,000 condo in Hudsonville, near Grand Rapids, Michigan, received an email on 19 May 2026, days before closing, telling them to wire US$66,026.92 for the down payment and closing costs within 24 hours. The email listed a phone number differing from their loan officer's by two digits, and the husband then received a call confirming the instructions in a voice that sounded just like the loan officer. The couple borrowed from family and other sources and wired the money. The day before closing their real loan officer sent the actual statement; the closing was cancelled hours before signing and the money was gone. The husband now believes the call came from a spoofed number using AI-assisted voice cloning; Tyler Adams of CertifID, which is working with the couple and federal officials, said someone's email in the transaction was probably compromised and that the scammers likely cloned the loan officer's voice from social-media clips. The sender's address had two extra letters ('UnitedsMortgages' instead of 'UnitedMortgage'). Neither the lender nor the loan officer is accused of complicity. The couple later completed the purchase in early June from their mutual fund, reported the loss to the FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center, and describe lasting apprehension and have discussed delaying retirement. CNN reported the case on 15 September 2026; the account the money went to has since closed.
Core concern Medium reported severity Investigation Opened
AI involvement suspected · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 20/09/2026
Jun 2026 to Aug 2026United StatesUnidentified image tool
Florida police arrested a man in September 2026 and charged him with creating and promoting altered sexual depictions of a woman, sexual cyberharassment and stalking. Police say a forensic examination of his devices showed he used AI to make sexually explicit images of her, some of them from photographs taken from social media and other online sources. They say several more women may have been depicted. The charges had not been tried at review.
Core concern High reported severity Criminal Charges
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 4 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 20/09/2026
2 Sept 2026United StatesMeta AI
On 1 September 2026 Kalie Robins, a Utah travel creator, posted a short Instagram video of herself singing in the car with one of her daughters; it was also shown on Facebook. The next day she noticed Meta AI had placed suggested questions under the post, starting with 'Who's the child passenger?'. Clicking the prompts, she said, produced her two daughters' names, birth information, photos and videos drawn from her own and relatives' past posts, including a newborn photo from her mother's account and a picture she believed she had deleted years earlier, and a further prompt, 'Where does Kalie Robins live?', assembled older and newer posts into her likely location. Her 2 September reaction video drew more than 310,000 likes. Meta told reporters the prompts 'missed the mark', 'should never have been generated' and had been fixed, while saying the feature only surfaces information the user can already access; it disputed that a long-deleted photo was used, saying the photo had been deleted shortly before the video and remained briefly visible through a bug. Robins said Meta never contacted her and that the episode left her feeling she had 'failed' her children.
Contextual tracker case Low reported severity Involving minors Internal Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 4 sources · Added 18/09/2026
Dec 2024 to Jun 2025United StatesUnidentified image and video tool
Between December 2024 and June 2025 James Strahler II, then 37, of Columbus (Upper Arlington), Ohio, harassed at least six women in central Ohio by phone, voicemail, text and web posts, sending them nude images that were both real and AI-generated, threatening rape, referring to their home addresses and demanding nude photos from their mothers. In one case he used AI to make pornographic videos depicting a victim with her father and sent them to her co-workers. He also posted AI-generated sexual images of boys from his community, morphing their faces onto other bodies. Prosecutors said he had installed more than 24 AI platforms and more than 100 web-based AI models on his phone. He pleaded guilty in April 2026 to cyberstalking, producing obscene visual representations of child sexual abuse and publication of digital forgeries, and on 8 September 2026 Chief U.S. District Judge Sarah D. Morrison sentenced him to 180 months in prison. The U.S. Attorney called it the first conviction in the nation under the 2025 Take It Down Act.
Core concern High reported severity Criminal Charges
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 4 sources · Added 18/09/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownUnidentified image and video tool
On 14 September 2026 the Manhattan District Attorney's Office announced that it had seized, under a court order, 12 domain names of websites it says were used to disseminate, publish and sell non-consensual 'deepfake' videos, and said its investigations were ongoing. The office alleges that people under investigation used AI image and video creation tools to turn existing photos and videos of approximately 1,200 real people, overwhelmingly women and mostly public-facing figures, into sexual images and videos that were then sold. The 1,200 figure is the office's estimate and is not a documented count. WIRED reported that it had observed seizure notices on several of the sites in the days before the announcement and quoted researchers who described the videos as pornographic films manipulated to show the targets' faces, many apparently reposted from the defunct MrDeepFakes site. When the depictions were made and published is not established; one site claimed to have been online since 2018.
Core concern High reported severity Investigation Opened
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources · Added 17/09/2026