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 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

Explore incidents Our scope and evidence

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 3 of 4 cases
0Core concern
AI communicated, acted for, depicted or impersonated 0Contextual cases
AI made a decision or claim about someone 4Unknown or pending relation
3 legacy rows pending · 1 explicitly unknown

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.

4cases 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.

3 20251 2026
Reported severity CriticalHighMedium
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

4 of 174 published cases

Export JSONExport CSV
4 May 2026France'DIGI', Gisi's in-house generative-AI editorial tool (transcription of interviews, drafting and correction help; planned spelling, grammar and typography correction, editorial-coherence and fact-reliability checks)

Créteil, France: a court suspended Gisi's (Infopro Digital) plan to cut eight sub-editor posts in favour of a generative-AI tool, finding a serious and characterised risk to the physical and mental health of several categories of staff

Gisi, the Infopro Digital subsidiary publishing L'Usine nouvelle, LSA and L'Argus de l'assurance (127 staff, 92 journalists), presented to its works council (CSE) on 4 May 2026 a reorganisation built around 'DIGI', an in-house generative-AI editorial tool, and on 12 May 2026 opened consultation on the reorganisation and on the resulting collective dismissal of its eight secrétaires de rédaction (sub-editors), to be replaced by two chefs d'édition, on the company's estimate that the tool would take over about 70% of sub-editor tasks. Some 250 journalists across Infopro Digital's 26 titles had struck in spring 2026 against a group-wide plan to cut 19 sub-editor posts, and according to Digital Watch (citing Stratégies) five of the eight Gisi sub-editors had received pre-dismissal interview letters. The CSE, relying on an expert report, went to the Créteil judicial court in July. On 15 September 2026 the référé judge found that deploying the plan without real-situation testing presented 'un risque grave et caractérisé sur la santé physique et mentale de plusieurs catégories de salariés', ordered the suspension of the reorganisation and the collective dismissal (including the redeployment processes) until real-situation tests and full pilot issues are produced, with a provisional penalty of 8,000 euros per day for three months, and refused the damages provision. Gisi said it would continue the tests and reserved the right to appeal.

AI relation unknown Court orderNews report AI involvement: supported Causal attribution: supported Medium reported severity Lawsuit Ongoing

Added 20/09/2026

13 Jul 2025Event location unknownChatGPT

Winters v. OpenAI (ChatGPT Medical Discouragement and Near-Fatal Pulmonary Embolism)

Scott Winters, a 55-year-old Florida pastor, suffered a massive bilateral pulmonary embolism on 13 July 2025 after allegedly consulting ChatGPT (GPT-4o) for roughly six weeks about worsening symptoms. The complaint alleges the chatbot repeatedly dismissed his symptoms as non-dangerous, advised him to remain immobile, invoked his Christian faith to deepen his reliance on it, and framed church members and family urging him to seek hospital care as people who 'simply don't understand.' He survived after ICU admission but lost his job, ministry and home. A lawsuit was filed 22 July 2026 in San Francisco County Superior Court.

AI relation under review Legacy evidence assessment: verified Causal attribution: alleged Critical reported severity Lawsuit Filed

Added 26/07/2026

1 May 2025United StatesChatGPT

Madden v. OpenAI (Hannah Madden Psychosis and Hospitalization)

Hannah Madden, 32, from North Carolina was involuntarily hospitalized for psychiatric care after ChatGPT told her she wasn't human and affirmed spiritual delusions. After using ChatGPT for work tasks, she began asking questions about philosophy and spirituality. As she slipped into mental health crisis and expressed suicidal thoughts, ChatGPT continued to affirm her delusions. She accumulated more than $75,000 in debt related to the crisis.

AI relation under review Legacy evidence assessment: verified Causal attribution: alleged Critical reported severity Lawsuit Filed

Added 11/01/2026

May 2025Event location unknownChatGPT

Brooks v. OpenAI (Allan Brooks ChatGPT-Induced Psychosis)

A 48-year-old Canadian man with no history of mental illness developed severe delusional beliefs after ChatGPT repeatedly praised his nonsensical mathematical ideas as 'groundbreaking' and urged him to patent them and warn national security. The incident resulted in work disability and a lawsuit filed as part of a wave of seven ChatGPT psychosis cases.

AI relation under review Legacy evidence assessment: verified Causal attribution: alleged High reported severity Lawsuit Filed

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