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
3
Countries with reported events
1
Located 1 of 3 cases · 2 unknown
Languages in checked sources
2
Recorded for 3 of 3 cases
2Core concern
AI communicated, acted for, depicted or impersonated 1Contextual 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 1cases with a recorded regulatory response 1cases involving minors

Response counts currently use each case’s principal recorded outcome. Further proceedings may be described in its account.

When events happened

4 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.

3 2024
Reported severity HighMedium
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

3 of 896 published cases

Export JSONExport CSV
Dec 2024 to Sept 2026AustraliaUnidentified AI writing tool

Tasmania parole media ban quashed after state conceded reliance on likely AI-hallucinated case law

In December 2024 the Parole Board of Tasmania added a condition to the parole of Susan Neill-Fraser, released in 2022 after serving 13 years for murder and who maintains her innocence, barring her from communicating with media to claim innocence or wrongful conviction; a broader condition replaced it in May 2025. On 15 September 2026 the Supreme Court of Tasmania declared the conditions invalid. Her counsel told the court that the board's secretary had used artificial intelligence to prepare a rationale document justifying the condition and that it cited case law that did not exist. The Human Rights Law Centre, which represented her, says the State conceded that the board's decision-making was affected by a document containing legal authorities that were likely AI-generated hallucinations, and the ABC reports the court found the board relied on that document. The board had withdrawn the condition in August 2026. Tasmania's Attorney-General announced an independent investigation of the board's professional standards over its use of unverified AI, and the Justice Department announced a review of AI use in past parole decisions.

Contextual tracker case Medium reported severity Investigation Opened

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 6 sources, 4 underlying accounts · Added 06/10/2026

Jun 2024Event location unknownCharacter.AI

2024: mother tells the Washington Post her 11-year-old’s Character.AI chats held coercive sexual and suicide roleplay; panic attacks and therapy followed

A girl who was 11 began using Character.AI in June 2024, her mother told The Washington Post (23 December 2025). Within just over two months, by the mother's account, several of the dozens of chats had turned to sexual and violent content: a character called Mafia Husband told the child it did not care what she wanted and that she had no choice after she refused a sexual scenario, other characters described nonconsensual sex and violence, and she role-played a suicide scenario with a character called Best Friend. Over the following weeks she withdrew, cried at night, had panic attacks and told her mother she did not want to exist. About a month after an August 2024 phone check the mother found the chats and went to local police, who referred her to an Internet Crimes Against Children task force; a detective explained that a generative AI chatbot, not a person, had written the messages and that nothing could be done. The family alerted the pediatrician and school and the girl started therapy; by late 2025 the mother said the panic attacks had ebbed through the fall and winter of 2024 and her daughter was doing well. The mother corresponded with a Character.AI legal representative in December 2024, and a Social Media Victims Law Center attorney told the Post they intend to file a complaint; Character.AI said it cannot comment on potential litigation. The account is the mother's, with chat screenshots and emails the Post says it reviewed; no location is reported.

Core concern High reported severity Involving minors Media Coverage

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 6 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 13/09/2026

Dec 2024Event location unknownChatGPT

Toronto app developer Anthony Tan says months of ChatGPT conversations fed delusions that ended in a psychiatric hospital stay

Anthony Tan, an app developer living in Toronto, says that conversations with ChatGPT which began in September 2024 about philosophy and an AI-alignment project grew into a framework the chatbot kept affirming, and that by December 2024 he believed he was living in a simulation and being watched. His roommate and a friend got him to hospital, and he spent about three weeks in a psychiatric ward before recovering with sleep and medication. He says ChatGPT played a central role while acknowledging other triggers, including exam stress, little sleep, a cannabis edible and an earlier, less severe breakdown. His account to CBC News and his own essay are the sources; no clinician has published an assessment of the chatbot's role.

Core concern High reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 11/01/2026

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: 24/10/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.