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
2
Countries with reported events
1
Located 1 of 2 cases · 1 unknown
Languages in checked sources
3
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.

0cases with a recorded lawsuit outcome 1cases 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 20241 2026
Reported severity HighMedium
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

2 of 404 published cases

Export JSONExport CSV
2 Jan 2026Event location unknownGrok

UK: Grok-made sexualised images of a Welsh presenter and campaigner against deepfake abuse and of a commentator and broadcaster, requested by anonymous X accounts around New Year 2026; South Wales Police and the Metropolitan Police closed their investigations without identifying a suspect after X did not answer information requests; the presenter is in pre-action correspondence with xAI

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism and The Observer reported on 29 September 2026 that police investigations into sexualised images generated by X's chatbot Grok had failed to identify anyone. A Welsh presenter and campaigner against deepfake abuse, who had criticised Grok publicly on New Year's Eve 2025, saw an anonymous X user ask '@grok' to put her in a bikini made of cling film; Grok generated the image from her profile photo and posted it. She reported it to South Wales Police on 2 January 2026, was not asked for a statement until March, and was told officers had not heard back from X; the case was closed (in May, per The Observer) with the force saying no suspect could be identified. The same account also targeted a commentator and broadcaster, who estimates about 300 Grok images and videos of her were posted during the wave, including one alongside Jeffrey Epstein reported to the Metropolitan Police, which likewise said no suspect could be identified. The presenter is now in pre-action legal correspondence with xAI (part of SpaceXAI) alleging misuse of private information and breaches of data-protection law and the Equality Act; the company told her lawyers it had not been possible in the time available to look into its communications with South Wales Police. BBC Wales had reported in January 2026 that explicit images of the presenter were created with the chatbot and shared without her consent.

Core concern Medium reported severity Investigation Opened

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 30/09/2026

1 Oct 2024 to 28 Feb 2025AustraliaUnidentified image and video tool

Adelaide: a law student who turned a teenage girl's school graduation photograph into sexually explicit deepfake images and videos shared across accounts on X, in Australia's first prosecution under the 2024 federal deepfake law, heard her victim impact statement at a pre-sentence hearing on 22 September 2026; she told the court the fake images had a 'painfully real' impact and that she first saw her real graduation photo on a pornography website beside the altered videos with her full name and school

William Hamish Yeates, then 18, of Netherby in Adelaide, created sexually explicit deepfake images and videos of a teenage girl with whom, his counsel said, he had developed an obsession (The Sun describes her as a former friend), using her school graduation photograph, and shared them across multiple accounts on X between October 2024 and February 2025. Appearing in court in February 2026 charged with eight counts of creating or altering sexual material without consent and 12 counts of using a carriage service in a harassing or offensive way, he became the first person in Australia prosecuted under the Commonwealth offence introduced in 2024 against adult deepfake pornography; in April 2026 he pleaded guilty to two counts of creating or altering sexual material without consent (October 2024 to February 2025) and two of the carriage-service offence, and the remaining counts were withdrawn. At a pre-sentence hearing in the South Australian District Court on 22 September 2026 the victim, now 19, told the court that the first time she saw her actual graduation picture was on a pornography website beside altered videos of her with her full name and school attached, that she feels sick whenever she sees the photo, that the discovery led to the darkest period of her life, and that although the images were fake their impact was painfully real. Yeates read an apology; his counsel cited diagnoses of autism spectrum disorder and compulsive sexual behaviour disorder and asked for no custody; the Commonwealth prosecutor sought imprisonment. Sentencing is listed for 22 October 2026.

Core concern High reported severity Criminal Charges

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 5 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 23/09/2026

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: 30/09/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.