Scarlett Johansson Sues AI App for Unauthorized Voice and Image Cloning

The AI system was used to create a voice clone of Scarlett Johansson for an advertisement without her permission, which directly implicates a breach of her personal and intellectual property rights. This unauthorized use of AI-generated content harms the actor's rights and reputation. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the violation of rights caused by the AI system's use.

The AI app used an AI system to clone Scarlett Johansson's voice and likeness without permission, which directly led to legal action due to unauthorized use. This constitutes a violation of intellectual property and personal rights, fitting the definition of an AI Incident as it involves harm through breach of rights caused by the AI system's use.

The event involves the use of an AI system to generate a synthetic voice mimicking Scarlett Johansson's voice without authorization. This use has led to a violation of her rights, as she was not a spokesperson for the app and her name and likeness were used without consent. The AI system's use directly caused harm in terms of rights violations, fitting the definition of an AI Incident under violations of human rights or intellectual property rights.

The event involves an AI system (an image-generating app) whose use has directly led to a violation of intellectual property rights by using Scarlett Johansson's name and likeness without consent. This unauthorized use of personal likeness in advertising is a breach of applicable law protecting intellectual property and personal rights, qualifying it as an AI Incident under the framework.

The AI system was used to create a voice clone of Scarlett Johansson, which was then used in an advertisement without her authorization. This unauthorized use of her voice through AI-generated content directly implicates violations of intellectual property and personal rights. Since the event involves realized harm through misuse of AI-generated voice cloning, it qualifies as an AI Incident.

The event describes the use of an AI system to generate unauthorized content using Scarlett Johansson's likeness, which directly leads to a violation of her rights (intellectual property and personal rights). This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly led to harm (violation of rights). The legal action and removal of the ad are responses to this incident but do not change the classification of the event itself.

The event involves an AI system (an AI image and video generation application) that used Scarlett Johansson's likeness and a synthesized voice without consent in promotional content. This unauthorized use infringes on Johansson's rights to her name, image, and voice, which is a violation of applicable privacy and publicity laws protecting fundamental rights. The harm here is a violation of rights (specifically privacy and intellectual property rights) caused by the AI system's use, qualifying this as an AI Incident under the framework.

The event involves an AI system that generated a fake image and dialogue of Scarlett Johansson without permission, leading to a violation of her rights. This is a direct harm related to the use of AI technology for unauthorized impersonation, which fits the definition of an AI Incident under violations of human rights or breach of applicable law protecting intellectual property and personal rights.

The event involves an AI system (the AI app) that used Scarlett Johansson's name and likeness without permission, leading to a legal claim. This unauthorized use infringes on her intellectual property and personal rights, which falls under violations of rights as defined in the AI Incident framework. The harm has already occurred as the ad was posted and then taken down following the lawsuit. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the realized violation of rights caused by the AI system's use.

The article describes an AI system (an AI image-generating app) that created and used a synthetic likeness and voice of Scarlett Johansson without her consent for advertising, which is a direct violation of her rights. This unauthorized use constitutes harm under the category of violations of human rights and intellectual property rights. The involvement of AI in generating the likeness and voice is explicit, and the harm has materialized, as evidenced by the legal action taken. Hence, this event meets the criteria for an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The AI system was used to generate images and a synthetic voice mimicking Scarlett Johansson without permission, directly leading to a violation of her rights (privacy and publicity). The event describes actual harm through unauthorized use of her likeness in advertising, which is a breach of legal protections. The involvement of AI in creating the fake images and voice is explicit, and the harm is realized, not just potential. Hence, this is an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The AI system (Lisa AI) generated images and an AI-synthesized voice of Scarlett Johansson without permission, which directly led to harm in terms of violation of her rights and unauthorized commercial use of her likeness. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly led to a breach of intellectual property and personal rights, causing harm to the individual involved. The legal action confirms the harm is recognized and materialized.

The event describes an AI-generated deepfake image of Scarlett Johansson used in an advertisement without her consent, which is a direct violation of her rights and unauthorized use of her likeness. The AI system's use directly led to this harm. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly led to a violation of rights (c) under the framework. The removal of the ad and legal actions are responses but do not negate the fact that the incident occurred.

The AI system's use in generating images and voice that imitate Scarlett Johansson without consent directly leads to a violation of her intellectual property and personal rights, which falls under harm category (c) - violations of human rights or breach of obligations protecting intellectual property rights. The event describes realized harm through unauthorized use and misrepresentation, making it an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The AI app used an AI system to generate synthetic images and voice of Scarlett Johansson without her permission, constituting a violation of her rights. This unauthorized use of her likeness and voice in an advertisement directly led to harm in terms of rights violations and potential reputational damage. The event describes a realized harm caused by the AI system's use, qualifying it as an AI Incident under the framework's definition of violations of human rights or intellectual property rights.

The AI system (Lisa AI app) was used to generate images, videos, and voice imitations of Scarlett Johansson without permission, which constitutes a violation of her intellectual property and publicity rights. This is a clear case of harm related to breach of intellectual property rights and personal rights due to the AI system's use. Since the harm has already occurred and legal action is underway, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the framework.

The AI system was used to generate a fake likeness and voice of Scarlett Johansson without consent, which is a clear violation of her rights and a breach of applicable laws protecting personal likeness and intellectual property. The harm has already occurred as the AI-generated ad was publicly disseminated, misleading viewers and exploiting Johansson's identity. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the realized harm caused by the AI system's use.

The AI app used Johansson's likeness and voice without permission, which is a breach of her rights. The AI system's role is pivotal as it generated the images and voice used in the advertisement. The legal action taken by Johansson confirms the harm has occurred. This fits the definition of an AI Incident due to violation of rights caused by the AI system's use.

The AI system (Lisa AI) was used to generate images and voice imitations of Scarlett Johansson without her permission, directly leading to a violation of her rights (unauthorized use of name, voice, likeness for advertising). This fits the definition of an AI Incident as the AI system's use has directly led to a breach of applicable law protecting fundamental and intellectual property rights. The event is not merely a potential hazard or complementary information but a realized harm requiring legal remedy.

The AI system was used to clone Johansson's voice, which directly led to a violation of her rights by using her likeness and voice without permission in an advertisement. The harm is realized as it involves unauthorized commercial use and potential reputational damage. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the direct harm caused by the AI system's use.

The event describes the use of an AI system to generate and distribute an image of Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which is a violation of her rights and a breach of legal protections regarding personal likeness and intellectual property. The AI system's use directly led to this harm, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident. The removal of the ad and legal actions are responses to this incident but do not negate the fact that harm occurred.

The AI app generated images and a simulated voice of Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which constitutes a violation of her rights, specifically the unauthorized commercial use of her name and likeness. This misuse of AI-generated content has directly led to legal action, indicating realized harm in terms of rights violations. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the framework, as the AI system's use has directly led to a breach of applicable law protecting individual rights.

The AI app used Johansson's face and voice without consent, which is a clear violation of her rights and intellectual property. This unauthorized use of AI-generated likeness and voice in advertising directly caused harm to Johansson's personal and publicity rights. The article describes actual harm (violation of rights) caused by the AI system's use, not just potential harm. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the framework, as it involves direct harm through misuse of AI-generated content infringing on individual rights.

The AI app used Scarlett Johansson's likeness without permission, which is a breach of intellectual property rights and personal rights. This unauthorized use of an AI-generated or AI-manipulated image directly leads to a violation of rights, fitting the definition of an AI Incident under violations of intellectual property rights. The legal action is a response to this realized harm.

The article describes an AI-generated advertisement using Scarlett Johansson's cloned image and voice without authorization, which directly infringes on her rights. The AI system's use led to harm in the form of unauthorized exploitation of her likeness, a violation of intellectual property and personal rights. The involvement of AI in cloning and generating the content is explicit, and the harm has already occurred, prompting legal action. Hence, this qualifies as an AI Incident under violations of rights.

The AI system (Lisa AI) generated images and an AI-synthesized voice of Scarlett Johansson without her permission, which is a direct misuse of AI technology leading to a violation of intellectual property and personality rights. This unauthorized use has caused harm to Johansson, prompting legal action. The event fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly led to harm (violation of rights and potential reputational and economic damage).

The event explicitly involves an AI system generating synthetic images and voice of Scarlett Johansson without consent, used in advertising. This unauthorized use directly leads to a violation of Johansson's rights, which fits the definition of an AI Incident under violations of human rights or breach of applicable law protecting fundamental rights. The legal action taken confirms the harm has occurred. Therefore, this is classified as an AI Incident.

The AI system (Lisa AI) was used to generate a deepfake voice and images of Scarlett Johansson without her permission, directly leading to a violation of her rights. The unauthorized cloning and use of her likeness and voice in an advertisement is a clear harm under the category of violations of human rights or intellectual property rights. The event describes realized harm and legal action in response, fitting the definition of an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The AI app used Scarlett Johansson's real footage to create artificial images and voice dialogue without her permission, which is a clear violation of her rights. The use of AI to generate and disseminate this content directly led to harm by infringing on her personal and intellectual property rights. The event describes a realized harm caused by the AI system's use, qualifying it as an AI Incident under the framework.

The event explicitly involves an AI system that cloned Johansson's voice and face to create an advertisement without her consent. The AI-generated content was used commercially, violating her legal rights to privacy and publicity. The harm is realized as it infringes on her rights and has prompted legal action. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use directly led to a violation of rights under applicable law, which is one of the specified harms.

The article describes a clear case where an AI system was used to generate a voice clone of Scarlett Johansson without authorization, leading to a legal dispute. This unauthorized use of AI-generated voice content infringes on her rights and is a direct harm caused by the AI system's use. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the violation of rights and misuse of AI-generated content.

The app Lisa AI used AI to create a deepfake of Scarlett Johansson's voice and likeness without her consent, which constitutes a violation of her rights. This is a clear case where the AI system's use has directly led to harm (violation of rights), fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident. The legal action taken by Johansson further confirms the recognition of harm caused by the AI system's misuse.

The AI app used AI-generated synthetic media (deepfake technology) to create fake images and voice of Scarlett Johansson without permission, which constitutes a violation of her rights, specifically her right to publicity and potentially intellectual property rights. The use of AI-generated content in this manner has directly led to harm by misappropriating her identity and misleading the public. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the realized harm caused by the AI system's use.

The event describes the use of an AI system to create a deepfake image of a real person without permission, which is a violation of intellectual property and personal rights, thus constituting harm under the AI Incident definition (c). The harm has already occurred as the deepfake advert was publicly displayed online. The involvement of AI in generating the deepfake is explicit. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident. The mention of the AI safety summit and concerns about future deepfake harms provides context but does not change the primary classification.

The event involves an AI system (an AI image-generating app) whose use has led to a violation of Johansson's rights through unauthorized use of her avatar and name. This constitutes a breach of intellectual property and personal rights, which falls under harm category (c) violations of human rights or breach of obligations under applicable law. Since the harm has occurred and legal action is underway, this qualifies as an AI Incident.

The event explicitly involves an AI system (an AI image-generating app and synthetic voice) that was used without authorization to create and disseminate content falsely representing Scarlett Johansson. This unauthorized use caused harm by violating her rights to privacy and publicity, which are protected under law. The harm is realized, as the AI-generated content was publicly distributed in an advertisement. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the direct involvement of AI in causing a violation of rights and harm to the individual.

The AI app used AI-generated images and synthetic voice to impersonate Scarlett Johansson without her consent, constituting a violation of her rights. This unauthorized use of her likeness for commercial endorsement is a clear harm under the framework's category of violations of human rights or breach of obligations protecting intellectual property and personal identity rights. Since the harm has already occurred and legal proceedings are underway, this qualifies as an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The AI app used artificial intelligence to create images and voice that imitate Scarlett Johansson, which constitutes a violation of her rights. The use of AI-generated likeness without consent can be considered a breach of intellectual property and personal rights. Since the event involves actual misuse of an AI system causing harm to an individual's rights, it qualifies as an AI Incident.

The AI app used Scarlett Johansson's likeness and voice without consent, which is a direct violation of her rights and intellectual property. The AI system's outputs were used in an advertisement, causing harm to the actress by unauthorized exploitation of her image and voice. This harm is a breach of applicable law protecting personality and intellectual property rights, fitting the definition of an AI Incident. The involvement of AI in generating the images and voice is explicit, and the harm is realized, not just potential.

The AI app used AI-generated images and voice impersonations of Scarlett Johansson without authorization, which directly caused harm by violating her rights. The event describes realized harm through unauthorized use of her likeness and name in an advertisement, leading to legal action. The AI system's role is pivotal as it generated the content causing the violation. Therefore, this is an AI Incident due to the direct harm to Johansson's rights caused by the AI system's use.

The article describes an AI app (Lisa AI) generating images and a fake voice of Scarlett Johansson without her permission, which constitutes a violation of her rights. The AI system's use directly led to harm in the form of unauthorized use of her likeness and voice, which is a breach of intellectual property and personal rights. The legal action taken and the legislative responses further confirm the recognition of harm. Hence, this is an AI Incident as the AI system's use has directly caused harm.

The article describes an AI system generating a synthetic voice of Scarlett Johansson without her consent for commercial advertising, which directly infringes on her intellectual property and personal rights. This unauthorized use of AI-generated content has caused harm to Johansson, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident under violations of intellectual property rights and personal likeness. The involvement of AI in creating the voice and the resulting legal dispute confirm this classification.

The AI company used AI to generate images and voice of Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which directly infringes on her rights. This unauthorized use of AI-generated likeness and voice for commercial purposes is a clear violation of intellectual property and personal rights, constituting harm under the framework. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the realized harm of rights violation caused by the AI system's use.

The AI app used AI-generated images and a synthetic voice to impersonate Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which constitutes a violation of her intellectual property and privacy rights. This unauthorized use has caused harm by misleading viewers into believing Johansson endorsed the app, thus infringing on her rights. The involvement of AI in generating the likeness and voice directly led to this harm, qualifying the event as an AI Incident under violations of human rights and intellectual property rights.

The AI app used AI-generated images and voice cloning technology to create a fake advertisement featuring Scarlett Johansson without her consent. This constitutes a violation of her rights and a breach of obligations intended to protect intellectual property and personal rights. The harm has already occurred as the ad was publicly posted and led to legal action, fitting the definition of an AI Incident due to the direct involvement of AI in causing harm.

The app 'Lisa AI' uses AI to generate images and videos that imitate Scarlett Johansson's likeness without consent, which constitutes a violation of her rights. The event describes actual use of AI-generated content causing harm (unauthorized use of likeness), leading to a lawsuit. This fits the definition of an AI Incident as the AI system's use has directly led to a breach of rights. The presence of the AI system is explicit, and the harm is realized through the unauthorized use and legal action.

The event involves an AI system (an AI image-generating app) whose use has directly led to a violation of intellectual property rights by using Johansson's likeness without consent. This is a clear harm under the category of violations of intellectual property rights, making it an AI Incident.

The AI system (Lisa AI) was used to generate an image and voice likeness of Scarlett Johansson without her permission, which directly leads to a violation of her rights. The event describes actual harm through unauthorized use and misrepresentation, not just a potential risk. The involvement of AI in generating the likeness and voice is explicit, and the harm is realized, meeting the criteria for an AI Incident under violations of rights.

The article describes real legal actions (e.g., Anil Kapoor's lawsuit to protect his likeness, George R.R. Martin's lawsuit against OpenAI for copyright infringement, Scarlett Johansson's legal action against unauthorized AI use of her voice) and public concerns about AI misuse. These involve AI systems' use leading to violations of intellectual property and personal rights, which constitute harms under the AI Incident definition. However, the article mainly focuses on the broader fight against AI misuse and the societal response rather than detailing new specific incidents of harm caused by AI systems themselves. Therefore, the article is best classified as Complementary Information, as it provides context and updates on societal and legal responses to AI-related harms rather than reporting a new AI Incident or AI Hazard.

The event describes the use of an AI system (Lisa AI) to generate images of Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which were then used in an online advertisement. This unauthorized use of her likeness constitutes a violation of her rights and is a direct harm caused by the AI system's outputs. The actress's decision to sue indicates that harm has materialized. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident because the AI system's use directly led to a violation of rights and harm to the individual.

The AI system (Lisa AI) generated images of Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which were used in an advertisement, directly leading to legal action. This unauthorized use of her likeness constitutes a violation of rights protected by law, fulfilling the criteria for harm under AI Incident definition (violation of rights). The event describes actual harm (unauthorized use and legal response), not just potential harm, so it is not merely a hazard or complementary information.

The AI app used AI-generated voice cloning and image generation to create content featuring Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which is a clear violation of her rights. This unauthorized use of AI-generated likeness and voice directly harms the individual by infringing on her intellectual property and personal rights. The event describes realized harm and legal consequences stemming from the AI system's use, fitting the definition of an AI Incident.

The article explicitly mentions an AI system (Lisa AI) generating a deepfake image of Scarlett Johansson used in an ad without permission, which constitutes a violation of rights and potential harm. However, the main focus is on the legal actions planned, regulatory challenges, and platform policies rather than on a new or ongoing AI Incident causing direct harm. The removal of the ad after legal outreach further supports that the incident is being addressed. The discussion of regulatory environments and platform policies fits the definition of Complementary Information, as it informs about governance and societal responses to AI harms rather than reporting a new harm event or a plausible future harm scenario.

The AI app used AI-generated deepfake technology to create and distribute unauthorized content featuring Scarlett Johansson's likeness and voice, which is a direct violation of her rights. The event describes actual harm through unauthorized use and legal action, not just potential harm. The AI system's use directly led to this violation, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident. The presence of the AI system is explicit, and the harm is clearly articulated as a rights violation, justifying classification as an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The AI app used AI-generated images and a fake voice mimicking Scarlett Johansson without authorization, which directly leads to a violation of her rights. This fits the definition of an AI Incident under violations of human rights or breach of obligations under applicable law protecting intellectual property and personality rights. The legal action and removal of the ad confirm the harm has occurred and is being addressed.

The event involves an AI system (Lisa AI) that used Scarlett Johansson's likeness and generated altered audio to promote the app without her consent. This unauthorized use of her image and voice constitutes a violation of her rights, which falls under violations of intellectual property and personal rights. Since the harm (unauthorized use and misrepresentation) has already occurred and legal action is underway, this qualifies as an AI Incident. The AI system's use directly led to the harm, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The event involves the use of an AI system to generate a voice that imitates Scarlett Johansson without her consent, leading to a violation of her rights, specifically related to unauthorized use of her identity and voice. This harm falls under violations of human rights or breach of applicable law protecting intellectual property and personal rights. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident because the AI-generated voice directly led to a legal dispute over rights infringement.

The AI app used Johansson's likeness and a fake voice generated by AI to promote itself without authorization, which is a clear violation of her rights. The harm is realized as it involves unauthorized use of personal identity and intellectual property, leading to legal action. The AI system's role is pivotal as it generated the deepfake content causing the harm. Hence, this is an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The AI system (Lisa AI) generated an image using Johansson's likeness without her consent, which is a violation of her rights. The event describes a direct harm caused by the AI system's use, leading to legal action. This fits the definition of an AI Incident as it involves a violation of intellectual property and personal rights due to the AI system's outputs. The harm is realized, not just potential, and the AI system's role is pivotal in causing this harm.

The AI app used AI-generated images and voice impersonation of Scarlett Johansson without consent, which is a clear violation of her rights. The event describes realized harm (unauthorized use of likeness and voice) caused by the AI system's outputs. The legal action confirms the harm is recognized and materialized. Hence, this is an AI Incident involving violation of rights due to AI misuse.

The AI app generated images and a synthetic voice mimicking Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which is a clear violation of her rights. This unauthorized use of her likeness and voice in a commercial context constitutes harm under the category of violations of human rights or intellectual property rights. Since the AI system's use directly led to this harm and legal action, this qualifies as an AI Incident.

The AI system (Lisa AI) was used to generate images and a voice resembling Scarlett Johansson without her permission, and these outputs were used in an ad promoting the AI app. This unauthorized use infringes on Johansson's rights, constituting a violation of intellectual property and personal rights, which falls under harm category (c) - violations of human rights or breach of obligations under applicable law protecting intellectual property rights. Therefore, this is an AI Incident because the AI system's use directly led to a legal rights violation.

The article describes an AI application generating images and synthetic voice of Scarlett Johansson without authorization for advertising purposes. This unauthorized use infringes on Johansson's rights and has led to legal proceedings, indicating actual harm has occurred. The AI system's role is pivotal as it enabled the creation of the unauthorized likeness and voice. Similar incidents with Tom Hanks reinforce the pattern of harm from AI-generated impersonations. Hence, this is an AI Incident involving violation of rights through misuse of AI-generated content.

The AI app used AI-generated images and voice impersonation of Scarlett Johansson without her permission, directly leading to a violation of her rights. The advertisement was taken down following legal action, indicating harm has occurred. The AI system's use in generating unauthorized likeness and voice impersonation is central to the incident. This fits the definition of an AI Incident as it involves harm to rights caused by the AI system's use.

The AI system was used to create a synthetic voice of Scarlett Johansson, which was then used in an advertisement without her authorization. This misuse of AI-generated content infringes on her personal and intellectual property rights, constituting a violation of rights under the framework. Since the event describes actual use and harm (misleading advertisement and unauthorized use of identity), it qualifies as an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The article explicitly mentions an AI app that generated a synthetic voice and images of Scarlett Johansson without her consent, used in an advertisement. This unauthorized use directly harms Johansson's rights and has led to legal action, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident under violations of human rights or breach of legal obligations. The AI system's use here is not hypothetical or potential harm but realized harm through misuse of AI-generated deepfake technology. The broader discussion about deepfakes and their risks supports the context but does not change the classification of this specific event as an AI Incident.

The AI app used AI-generated images and a fake voice to imitate Scarlett Johansson, falsely implying her endorsement, which constitutes a violation of her rights and harms her reputation. The AI system's use directly led to this harm, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident involving violations of rights and potentially misleading advertising. Therefore, this is classified as an AI Incident.

The event involves an AI system (an image-generating app with AI-generated video and voice) that used Scarlett Johansson's name, likeness, and AI-generated voice without authorization in advertisements. This unauthorized use directly infringes on Johansson's rights, which is a violation of applicable law protecting personal and intellectual property rights. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the realized harm of rights violation caused by the AI system's use.

The AI system (Lisa AI) was used to generate images and a fake voice resembling Scarlett Johansson, which were then used in an advertisement without her consent. This unauthorized use directly leads to a violation of Johansson's rights, specifically her right to control the commercial use of her likeness and voice. The event meets the criteria for an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly led to a breach of obligations under applicable law protecting individual rights. The legal action taken further confirms the recognition of harm.

The event explicitly involves an AI system generating a likeness and voice of a real person without consent, which is a misuse of AI technology. This misuse has led to a legal dispute, indicating a breach of rights. The harm is realized as it infringes on Johansson's rights and potentially misleads consumers. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the direct harm caused by the AI system's use.

The event involves an AI system generating synthetic media (deepfake) of a real person without authorization, leading to a violation of rights. This is a direct harm caused by the AI system's use, fitting the definition of an AI Incident due to breach of intellectual property and personal rights. The use of AI to create unauthorized likeness and voice constitutes a clear harm under the framework.

The AI system was used to create and disseminate deepfake content of a celebrity without consent, directly leading to a legal dispute over rights violations. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI's use has directly led to a breach of obligations intended to protect fundamental and intellectual property rights. The harm is realized as the unauthorized use has already occurred and legal remedies are being pursued.

The AI system (Lisa AI app) was used to generate a voice clone of Scarlett Johansson and create an ad implying her endorsement without permission. This constitutes a violation of her rights, specifically her likeness and voice rights, and is misleading to the public. The use of AI-generated content directly led to harm in terms of violation of personal rights and potential reputational damage. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the category of violations of human rights or breach of applicable law protecting fundamental rights.

The article describes a company using AI to generate an ad featuring Scarlett Johansson's likeness and voice without her consent. This unauthorized use of her image and voice for commercial gain is a violation of her rights and has resulted in legal action. The AI system's role is pivotal as it was used to create the cloned likeness and voice, directly causing the harm. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the realized violation of rights stemming from the AI system's use.

The AI system (Lisa AI) generated images and a video using Scarlett Johansson's likeness without permission, which directly led to a legal claim for violation of rights. The harm is realized as it involves unauthorized use of personal likeness and name in advertising, infringing on Johansson's rights. The AI system's development and use are central to this harm, meeting the criteria for an AI Incident under violations of human rights and intellectual property rights.

The AI app used artificial intelligence to generate images and voice clones of Scarlett Johansson without authorization, which is a clear violation of her intellectual property and personal rights. The event describes actual harm through unauthorized use and misrepresentation, leading to legal action. The AI system's role is pivotal as it enabled the cloning and generation of the actress's likeness and voice, directly causing the harm. Hence, this is an AI Incident under the framework.

The event describes the use of an AI system to generate fake images and voice of a real person without permission, which directly leads to a violation of rights (celebrity likeness and identity rights). This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly led to harm in the form of unauthorized use of personal likeness and potential reputational damage. The harm is realized, not just potential, and the AI system's role is pivotal in creating the fake content.

The AI system (Lisa AI app) was used to generate a cloned voice and images of Scarlett Johansson without permission, which is a direct misuse of AI technology causing harm to the actor's rights. The event describes a realized harm (unauthorized use of identity and voice), and the involvement of AI is explicit and central to the incident. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the direct harm caused by the AI system's use in violating Johansson's rights.

The article explicitly mentions AI-driven applications generating manipulated images and videos without consent, directly infringing on personal rights and intellectual property, which are harms under the AI Incident definition (violations of human rights and intellectual property rights). The unauthorized use of Scarlett Johansson's likeness and voice, the viral morphed video of Kartik Aaryan, and the copyright lawsuits against AI models demonstrate direct harm caused by AI systems' use. The event involves the use and misuse of AI systems leading to realized harm, not just potential harm or general AI news, thus classifying it as an AI Incident.

The article explicitly describes AI systems being used to generate unauthorized content involving celebrities' voices and likenesses, such as AI-generated ads using Scarlett Johansson's voice without consent, AI recreations of Robin Williams' voice, and AI training on copyrighted works without permission leading to lawsuits. These constitute violations of intellectual property and personal rights, which are harms under the AI Incident definition. The involvement of AI in these harms is direct and central. The article also mentions legal actions and strikes responding to these harms, reinforcing the classification as an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The AI system (the image and video generating app) was used to create fake content of Scarlett Johansson without permission, directly leading to harm in the form of violation of her rights and potential reputational damage. The use of AI-generated deepfakes and voice mimicking clearly involves AI system use and misuse. The harm is realized, not just potential, as the fake advertisement was publicly posted and viewed. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to violation of rights caused by the AI system's use.

The AI system was used to generate images and voice resembling Scarlett Johansson without her permission, which directly led to a violation of her rights and legal action. The event describes realized harm (unauthorized use of likeness in advertising), which fits the definition of an AI Incident under violations of human rights or breach of obligations protecting fundamental and intellectual property rights. The involvement of the AI system is explicit and central to the harm caused.

The AI system's use in generating a fake avatar and voice of Scarlett Johansson without permission directly led to a violation of her rights, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident under violations of human rights or breach of applicable law protecting personal rights. The advert's removal following legal pressure confirms the harm was realized. The mention of AI-enhanced music production is background information and does not describe harm or plausible harm. Therefore, the primary classification is AI Incident due to the unauthorized deepfake advert.

The app used AI to replicate Scarlett Johansson's voice and appearance without her consent, which constitutes a violation of her rights, specifically intellectual property and personality rights. The AI system's use directly led to harm by misappropriating her identity for commercial purposes. Similar incidents involving other celebrities are mentioned, reinforcing the pattern of AI misuse causing harm. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the realized harm from the AI system's use.

The use of AI to replicate Scarlett Johansson's voice without her consent directly leads to a violation of her rights, specifically intellectual property and possibly personality rights. This harm has already occurred as the AI-generated voice was used in a commercial advertisement without authorization. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the category of violations of human rights or breach of obligations intended to protect intellectual property rights.

The event involves the use of an AI system (an app generating images and synthetic voice) that directly led to a violation of Johansson's rights by using her image and voice without consent, constituting a breach of intellectual property and personal rights. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly led to harm (violation of rights).

The article explicitly describes an AI system (the 'Lisa AI' app) that cloned Scarlett Johansson's image without consent, which is a direct violation of her rights. The use of AI to generate and use her likeness in an advertisement without permission constitutes harm under the framework's category of violations of human rights or breach of applicable law protecting intellectual property and personal rights. The harm is realized, not just potential, as the image was publicly used and led to legal action. Hence, this is classified as an AI Incident.

The event describes the use of an AI system to generate a false image of Scarlett Johansson for advertising without her permission, which is a violation of her rights (specifically personality and possibly intellectual property rights). The AI system's use directly led to harm in terms of unauthorized exploitation of her image and reputation. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the category of violations of human rights or breach of applicable law protecting fundamental rights.

The event describes an AI system (Lisa AI) generating images and synthetic voice of Scarlett Johansson without authorization, which is a direct violation of her rights. The use of AI-generated content in an advertisement without consent has caused harm to Johansson's rights, triggering legal proceedings. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly led to a breach of intellectual property and personality rights.

The article describes an AI-powered app that cloned Scarlett Johansson's voice without her consent and used it in a promotional video, which led to a lawsuit. The AI system's use directly caused a violation of Johansson's rights, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident under violations of human rights or intellectual property rights. The harm is realized, not just potential, as the unauthorized use has already occurred and legal action is underway.

The article explicitly mentions an AI system (Lisa AI) generating images and voice mimicking Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which constitutes a violation of her rights. The harm is realized as the unauthorized use of her likeness and voice in advertising, infringing on her intellectual property and personal rights. The AI system's use directly led to this harm, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident. The event is not merely a potential risk or a complementary update but a concrete case of harm caused by AI misuse.

The AI system was used to create a synthetic voice of Scarlett Johansson without her permission, which constitutes a violation of her intellectual property and personality rights. This is a direct harm related to the use of an AI system, as it involves unauthorized use of her likeness and voice, potentially infringing on her rights. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the category of violations of human rights or breach of obligations intended to protect intellectual property rights.

The AI system (Lisa AI) generated images and voice of Scarlett Johansson without authorization, which were used in an advertisement, causing harm to her rights. This is a clear violation of intellectual property and personal rights, fitting the definition of an AI Incident as the AI system's use directly led to harm. The legal action taken by Johansson further confirms the harm has occurred.

The article describes an AI system used to clone Scarlett Johansson's voice and generate images for an advertisement without her permission, which is a violation of her rights. The harm is realized as it involves illegal use of her identity and voice, leading to legal action. The AI system's development and use directly caused this harm. Similar cases with other celebrities reinforce the pattern of harm caused by AI-generated deepfakes. Hence, this is an AI Incident due to violation of intellectual property and personal rights caused by AI misuse.

The article describes an AI system used to generate a deepfake likeness of Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which was used in a commercial context. This unauthorized use of AI-generated content infringes on her rights and has caused harm by exploiting her image for profit. The involvement of AI in creating the deepfake and the resulting legal dispute meet the criteria for an AI Incident, as there is a direct violation of rights due to the AI system's use.

The article explicitly mentions an AI system (Lisa AI) generating images and voice content of Scarlett Johansson without consent, which is a direct violation of intellectual property and personal rights. The harm has materialized as the actress has filed a lawsuit, and the incident is part of ongoing labor disputes concerning AI's impact on actors' rights. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to realized harm caused by the AI system's use.

The event involves an AI system generating images and voices of a celebrity without consent, which is a direct violation of rights and intellectual property laws. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly led to a breach of obligations intended to protect fundamental and intellectual property rights. The legal actions and public statements confirm the harm has materialized, not just a potential risk.

The article describes an AI system (an app generating deepfake videos) that was used to create and distribute a synthetic video of Scarlett Johansson without her consent. This use of AI directly led to a violation of her rights, prompting legal action. The harm is realized (unauthorized use of image and voice), and the AI system's role is pivotal in causing this harm. Hence, it meets the criteria for an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The article explicitly mentions an AI system (Lisa AI) generating images and voice clones of Scarlett Johansson without consent, used in a commercial context. This unauthorized use directly leads to a violation of Johansson's rights, which is a recognized harm under the AI Incident definition. The involvement of AI in creating the cloned content is central to the harm, and the legal action confirms the harm has occurred. Hence, the event is classified as an AI Incident.

The event explicitly involves an AI system ('Lisa AI') that generated images cloning Scarlett Johansson's likeness without her consent, used in a promotional video. This unauthorized use directly violates her rights, including intellectual property and personal rights, which falls under harm category (c) in the definitions. The harm has already occurred as the image was used publicly, prompting legal action. Hence, it meets the criteria for an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The article describes an AI-generated voice clone of Scarlett Johansson used in a commercial without her permission. This unauthorized use of her voice and image infringes on her rights, constituting a breach of intellectual property and personality rights. The AI system's role in creating the synthetic voice is pivotal to the harm. Hence, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the category of violations of human rights or breach of obligations under applicable law protecting intellectual property rights.

The event involves an AI system (Lisa AI) that generates synthetic voice and image content of a real person without consent, leading to a violation of the actress's rights. This is a direct harm caused by the AI system's use, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident under violations of human rights and intellectual property rights. The legal action confirms the harm is realized, not just potential. Therefore, the classification is AI Incident.

The article explicitly mentions an AI system generating images and voice of Scarlett Johansson without permission, which were used in a commercial advertisement. This unauthorized use directly violates her rights, fulfilling the criteria for harm under (c) violations of human rights or breach of intellectual property rights. The involvement of the AI system in creating the deepfake content is central to the incident. Legal actions have been initiated, confirming the recognition of harm. Hence, this is classified as an AI Incident.

The event involves an AI system (an AI image generator) that was used to create and disseminate unauthorized deepfake content of a real person, Scarlett Johansson, without her consent. This use directly led to a violation of her rights, specifically intellectual property and personal image rights, which falls under harm category (c) - violations of human rights or breach of obligations under applicable law. Since the harm has materialized and legal action is underway, this qualifies as an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The event explicitly involves an AI system generating unauthorized images and voice of Scarlett Johansson, which were used in a commercial context without her consent. This use of AI-generated deepfake content infringes on her rights, constituting a violation of applicable law protecting personal and intellectual property rights. The harm has materialized as the actress has taken legal action, and the advertisement was removed. Hence, the AI system's use directly led to a violation of rights, meeting the criteria for an AI Incident.

The article explicitly mentions the use of an AI system to generate images and voice that imitate Scarlett Johansson without her consent, used in a commercial advertisement. This unauthorized use infringes on her rights and has led to legal action, indicating realized harm. The AI system's development and use directly caused this harm by creating and disseminating synthetic media that violates personal rights. Hence, it meets the criteria for an AI Incident involving violations of human rights and legal obligations.

The AI system (Lisa AI) generated deepfake images of Scarlett Johansson without consent, which were used in advertising, directly infringing on her rights. This is a clear case of harm caused by the use of an AI system, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident. The article also references similar concerns and legal responses in the industry, reinforcing the context of realized harm due to AI misuse.

The event clearly involves an AI system generating content (images and voice) that impersonates a real person without consent, leading to a violation of rights. The unauthorized use of Johansson's likeness and voice in a commercial context is a direct harm under the definition of AI Incident, specifically a breach of obligations under applicable law intended to protect intellectual property and personal rights. The presence of the AI system is explicit (Lisa AI app), and the harm has occurred (the ad was published online). Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident.

The event describes the use of an AI system to create a synthetic likeness and voice of a real person without permission, which directly leads to a violation of rights under applicable law. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly led to a breach of obligations intended to protect fundamental and intellectual property rights. The harm is realized, not just potential, as the unauthorized advertisement was published and then removed following legal action.

The article describes an AI system (Lisa AI) generating images and voice that imitate Scarlett Johansson without authorization, used in a commercial advertisement. This unauthorized use infringes on Johansson's rights, constituting harm under the category of violations of human rights and intellectual property rights. The AI system's use directly caused this harm, and legal steps have been taken in response. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The article describes a clear case where an AI system was used to generate a deepfake of a celebrity's image and voice without permission, which was then used in advertising. This unauthorized use infringes on Johansson's rights and has caused harm by misappropriating her likeness and voice. The involvement of AI in generating the content is explicit, and the harm (violation of rights) is realized, as evidenced by the lawsuit. Hence, this event meets the criteria for an AI Incident.

The event involves an AI system (Lisa AI) generating deepfake images and voice mimicking Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which is a direct violation of her rights. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly led to a breach of intellectual property and personal rights. The lawsuit and removal of the advertisement confirm that harm has materialized. Therefore, this is classified as an AI Incident.

The event clearly involves an AI system (Lisa AI) generating synthetic images and voice of Scarlett Johansson without permission, which is a misuse of AI technology. This has led to a violation of her rights (image and voice used without consent), which fits the definition of an AI Incident under violations of human rights or breach of applicable law protecting intellectual property and personal rights. The harm is realized as the unauthorized advertisement was published and then removed following legal action.

The event describes the use of an AI system to clone a person's voice without permission, which is a violation of intellectual property and personal rights. The actress has taken legal action, indicating that harm has materialized. The AI system's use directly led to this harm. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the definition of violations of human rights or breach of obligations under applicable law protecting intellectual property rights.

The event explicitly involves an AI system generating a synthetic voice that mimics a real person's voice without permission, which constitutes a violation of intellectual property and privacy rights. The harm is realized as the unauthorized use of Johansson's voice and image in advertising, leading to legal action. The AI system's use directly led to this harm, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident under violations of rights. The event is not merely a potential risk or complementary information but a concrete case of harm caused by AI misuse.

The article describes an AI system (Lisa AI) generating synthetic images and voice of Scarlett Johansson without permission, which were used in a misleading advertisement. This unauthorized use infringes on her rights and has led to legal action, indicating realized harm. The AI system's use directly caused this harm, fitting the definition of an AI Incident due to violation of rights and harm to the individual.

The AI system was used to generate an avatar and voice of Scarlett Johansson without permission, directly leading to a violation of her rights. The unauthorized use of her image and voice in advertising constitutes harm under the framework's category of violations of human rights and intellectual property rights. The event describes realized harm and ongoing legal response, fitting the definition of an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The AI system's use has directly led to a violation of rights, specifically the unauthorized use of Scarlett Johansson's likeness and voice, which is a breach of intellectual property and personal rights protections. This harm has already occurred as the AI-generated content was publicly disseminated, prompting legal action. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the realized harm involving rights violations caused by the AI system's outputs.

The AI system was used to generate Scarlett Johansson's voice and likeness without consent, which constitutes a violation of her rights, specifically intellectual property and possibly personality rights. This unauthorized use has led to a legal dispute, indicating harm has occurred. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to violation of rights caused by the AI system's use.

An AI system ('Lisa AI') was used to create synthetic content featuring Scarlett Johansson without her permission, leading to a violation of her intellectual property and publicity rights. The AI-generated content was used in an advertisement, causing harm through unauthorized exploitation of her identity. This fits the definition of an AI Incident as it involves a breach of rights due to the AI system's use.

An AI system (the AI image generation application) was used to create and disseminate content (voice and image) without consent, violating Johansson's rights. This constitutes a violation of intellectual property and personal rights, which falls under harm category (c) - violations of human rights or breach of obligations under applicable law. Since the harm has occurred (unauthorized use and promotion), this qualifies as an AI Incident.

The AI system was used to create a synthetic voice and avatar resembling Scarlett Johansson, and this unauthorized use has led to a legal dispute alleging violation of rights. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly led to a breach of intellectual property and personal rights, which are protected under applicable law.

An AI system was used to generate a voice resembling Scarlett Johansson's, and the unauthorized use of her name, image, and voice in the advertisement has led to a legal dispute. This constitutes a violation of rights under applicable law, which fits the definition of an AI Incident involving harm through breach of intellectual property and personality rights.

The AI system was used to create synthetic content (voice and image) that infringes on Scarlett Johansson's rights, constituting a violation of intellectual property and personal rights. This harm falls under category (c) of AI Incidents (violations of human rights or breach of obligations under applicable law). Since the event describes actual unauthorized use and legal action, it qualifies as an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The event involves the use of an AI system to generate synthetic voice and images without consent, directly leading to a violation of the celebrities' rights. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly led to a breach of obligations under applicable law intended to protect fundamental and intellectual property rights. The legal lawsuit confirms that harm has occurred, not just a potential risk. Therefore, this is classified as an AI Incident.

The AI system (an AI image and voice generation application) was used without authorization to create and distribute content featuring Scarlett Johansson's likeness and voice, directly leading to legal claims of privacy infringement. This constitutes a violation of rights under applicable law, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident as the AI system's use directly caused harm (violation of privacy and intellectual property rights).

The article describes an AI application that generates synthetic voice and images of a real person, Scarlett Johansson, and uses them in advertising without her permission. This unauthorized use infringes on her rights, which falls under violations of intellectual property and personal rights. Since the AI system's use has directly caused harm (legal and reputational) to Johansson, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the framework, specifically under violations of human rights or breach of intellectual property rights.

The article describes an AI system generating a voice and avatar resembling Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which is a clear violation of her intellectual property and personal rights. The AI system's use directly led to harm by unauthorized use of her identity in advertising. This meets the criteria for an AI Incident under violations of human rights or breach of intellectual property rights. The mention of a lawsuit further confirms the harm has materialized and is being addressed legally.

An AI system (Lisa AI) was used to generate images of Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which is a breach of her rights. The harm is a violation of intellectual property and personal rights due to the AI system's use. Since the harm has occurred and legal action is underway, this qualifies as an AI Incident under violations of rights.

The event involves the use of an AI system (an AI image and voice generator) to create a synthetic version of Scarlett Johansson's likeness and voice without authorization, which constitutes a violation of intellectual property and personal rights. Since the AI system's use has directly led to a breach of rights, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the framework.

The event involves an AI system that generated synthetic images and voice of a real person without consent, leading to a violation of her rights. The use of AI-generated content in an advertisement without authorization directly caused harm to Scarlett Johansson's rights. The legal action and the removal of the advertisement confirm that the harm is realized, not just potential. Hence, this is an AI Incident under the framework, as it involves harm to intellectual property and privacy rights caused by the use of an AI system.

The AI system (Lisa AI) was used to create synthetic images and voice of a real person without authorization, which directly leads to a violation of her rights. The event describes actual harm (unauthorized use of likeness and voice in advertising), not just a potential risk. The involvement of AI in generating the content is explicit, and the harm is a breach of privacy and possibly intellectual property rights, fitting the definition of an AI Incident under violations of human rights or breach of legal protections.

The event describes the use of an AI system to create and deploy AI-generated images and voice of a real person without permission, which directly leads to a violation of rights. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly led to harm in the form of unauthorized use of personal likeness and voice, which is a breach of intellectual property and personal rights. Therefore, this is classified as an AI Incident.

The event involves the unauthorized use of Scarlett Johansson's voice and likeness generated by an AI system in a commercial context. This constitutes a violation of her rights, specifically intellectual property and possibly personal rights related to image and voice. Since the AI system's use directly led to a legal dispute over rights violations, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the framework, as it involves harm through breach of obligations intended to protect intellectual property rights.

The event involves an AI system (Lisa AI) that generated a synthetic video and voice mimicking Scarlett Johansson without her permission. This use of AI directly led to a violation of her rights, as it exploited her likeness and voice without consent. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the category of violations of human rights or intellectual property rights caused by the use of an AI system.

The event involves the use of an AI system to replicate a celebrity's voice without consent, which is a violation of intellectual property and personal rights. This unauthorized use has led to legal action, indicating realized harm. Therefore, it qualifies as an AI Incident due to violation of rights caused by AI-generated content misuse.

The event involves an AI system that generated a synthetic voice mimicking Scarlett Johansson without her permission, used in a commercial context. This unauthorized use of AI technology infringes on Johansson's rights, which is a breach of applicable law protecting intellectual property and personal rights. The direct harm is the violation of her rights through the AI system's use, making this an AI Incident.

The AI system (Lisa AI) generated a synthetic video and voice impersonating Scarlett Johansson, which was used in an advertisement without her permission. This unauthorized use constitutes a violation of her rights, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident under violations of human rights or intellectual property rights. The event describes realized harm due to the AI system's use, not just a potential risk or complementary information.

The use of AI to generate unauthorized images and dialogue of a person without consent directly leads to a violation of intellectual property and personal rights, which falls under harm category (c) in the AI Incident definition. Since the harm has already occurred (the unauthorized ad was published and then removed after backlash), this qualifies as an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The event involves an AI system generating synthetic images and voice of a real person without consent, leading to a legal dispute over rights violations. The AI system's use directly caused harm by unauthorized use of Johansson's likeness and voice, which is a breach of rights. This fits the definition of an AI Incident as the AI system's use has directly led to a violation of rights. The presence of similar lawsuits by other celebrities further supports the classification as an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The article describes an AI system (Lisa AI) generating a fake image and voice of Scarlett Johansson, which is used in a promotional video without her consent. This unauthorized use of AI-generated synthetic media directly leads to a violation of her rights, including intellectual property and personal rights. The harm is realized as the actress has taken legal action, indicating actual harm rather than potential harm. Hence, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the framework.

The article explicitly mentions an AI system (voice cloning application) that has been used to clone Scarlett Johansson's voice without her consent, leading to legal action. This use of AI directly infringes on her rights, including potentially intellectual property and personal rights, which fits the definition of an AI Incident involving violations of human rights or breach of legal protections. Therefore, this event qualifies as an AI Incident.

The article explicitly states that an AI system was used to clone Scarlett Johansson's voice without permission for a commercial advertisement, which led to legal action by Johansson. The AI system's use directly caused a violation of her rights, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident under the definition of harm to intellectual property and personal rights. The harm is realized, not just potential, as the unauthorized use has already occurred.

The AI system (Lisa AI) is explicitly mentioned as generating avatar images and voice mimicking Scarlett Johansson without consent. This unauthorized use directly leads to a violation of Johansson's intellectual property and personality rights, which falls under harm category (c) - violations of human rights or breach of obligations under applicable law protecting intellectual property rights. Since the harm is realized and the AI system's use is central to the incident, this qualifies as an AI Incident.

The AI system's use in cloning Johansson's voice and deploying it in an advertisement without consent directly leads to a violation of her rights, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident under violations of human rights or intellectual property rights. The involvement of AI in generating the synthetic voice is explicit, and the harm (unauthorized use of identity and likeness) is realized, not just potential. Therefore, this event qualifies as an AI Incident.

The article describes a clear case where an AI system was used to generate deepfake content of a real person without permission, leading to a lawsuit. The harm involves violation of rights (intellectual property and personal rights) due to unauthorized use of Johansson's likeness and name. The AI system's role is pivotal as it generated the deepfake content that caused the harm. The event is not merely a potential risk or a complementary update but a realized harm with legal consequences, fitting the definition of an AI Incident.

The article explicitly describes an AI system generating synthetic voice and images of Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which were used in a public advertisement. This unauthorized use infringes on her rights and has led to legal action, indicating realized harm. The AI system's use directly caused the violation, fitting the definition of an AI Incident involving breach of intellectual property and personality rights. The presence of the AI system is clear, the harm is direct and realized, and the legal response confirms the seriousness of the incident.

The event explicitly involves an AI system that clones a celebrity's voice for commercial use without consent, which is a violation of rights and personal harm. The AI system's use directly caused this harm, prompting legal action. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because it involves harm to rights (violation of personal and intellectual property rights) caused by the AI system's use. The legal response and the nature of the harm confirm this classification.

The AI system was used to create synthetic images and voice of a real person without permission, which constitutes a violation of intellectual property and personal rights. This is a direct harm related to the breach of rights under applicable law protecting personal image and voice rights. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to violation of rights caused by the AI system's use.

The article explicitly mentions the use of AI to clone the actress's voice and image without consent, constituting a violation of her rights. This is a direct harm caused by the AI system's use, fitting the definition of an AI Incident under violations of human rights or breach of legal protections. The harm is realized, not just potential, as legal actions are being taken due to this misuse.

The AI system's use directly led to a violation of Johansson's rights by generating and disseminating her likeness and voice without permission, which is a breach of applicable laws protecting image and intellectual property rights. This harm has already occurred, making it an AI Incident. The event is not merely a potential risk or a general discussion but involves realized harm through misuse of AI-generated content.

The AI system was used to create synthetic media (deepfake-like content) of Scarlett Johansson without permission, which is a violation of her rights. This unauthorized use of her image and voice in a commercial context is a clear harm under the category of violations of human rights or intellectual property rights. Since the harm has already occurred and legal action is underway, this qualifies as an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The article explicitly describes an AI system generating images and voice resembling Scarlett Johansson without permission, used in a commercial advertisement. This unauthorized use infringes on Johansson's rights, leading to legal action. The AI system's use directly caused harm in the form of rights violations. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the realized harm from the AI system's use.

The article describes an AI system (Lisa AI) generating images and synthetic voice of Scarlett Johansson without authorization, used in an advertisement. This unauthorized use infringes on Johansson's rights, constituting a violation of legal protections related to name, voice, and image. The harm is direct and realized, as it involves misuse of personal identity and potential reputational damage. The involvement of AI in generating the content is explicit, and the legal action confirms the harm. Hence, this is an AI Incident.

The event involves an AI system (Lisa AI) generating images and synthetic voice content that impersonate Scarlett Johansson without consent, used in an advertisement. This unauthorized use of her identity and likeness constitutes a violation of intellectual property and personal rights, which falls under violations of human rights or breach of applicable law protecting intellectual property rights. Since the harm (unauthorized use and potential reputational damage) has already occurred, this qualifies as an AI Incident.

The article explicitly mentions the use of AI to generate a voice imitation of Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which is a direct violation of her rights. The AI system's use led to harm in the form of unauthorized use of her voice, which is a breach of intellectual property and personal rights. This harm has already occurred, as the advertisement was released and then withdrawn following the complaint. Hence, the event meets the criteria for an AI Incident because the AI system's use directly caused a violation of rights.

The event describes an AI system generating images and voice mimicking Scarlett Johansson without authorization, used in an advertisement. This unauthorized use infringes on her rights and is a clear example of harm caused by AI misuse. The AI system's role is pivotal as it created the deepfake content leading to the violation. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the category of violations of human rights and intellectual property rights.

The article explicitly mentions an AI system generating synthetic images and voice of Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which constitutes a violation of her rights. The harm is realized as the unauthorized use of her likeness and voice, leading to legal action. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use directly caused a breach of intellectual property and personal rights. The event is not merely a potential risk or a complementary update but a concrete case of harm resulting from AI use.

The event describes the use of an AI system to generate synthetic voice and image content of Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which has led to a legal complaint. This is a direct harm related to the AI system's use, specifically a violation of rights (intellectual property and personal rights). The AI system's role is pivotal as it enabled the creation of the unauthorized content. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the framework, as it involves realized harm caused by the AI system's use.

The article explicitly mentions the use of an AI image generation system to create unauthorized images and voice resembling Scarlett Johansson, which were used in advertising without her consent. This unauthorized use infringes on her rights and has led to legal action. The AI system's development and use directly caused this harm. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to violation of intellectual property and personal rights caused by the AI-generated content.

The event clearly involves an AI system used to generate images and synthetic voice imitating a real person without permission, which has led to a violation of rights. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly led to a breach of obligations intended to protect fundamental and intellectual property rights. The harm is realized (unauthorized use and potential reputational damage), and legal action is underway. Therefore, this is classified as an AI Incident.

The event explicitly involves an AI system (Lisa AI) generating images and synthetic voice of Scarlett Johansson without consent, used in a commercial advertisement. This unauthorized use infringes on Johansson's legal rights to her image and voice, constituting a violation of human rights and legal obligations. The harm is direct and realized, as the advertisement was publicly shown and led to legal action. The involvement of AI in generating the content is central to the incident. Therefore, the classification as an AI Incident is appropriate.

The article describes an AI system that generated images and voice resembling Scarlett Johansson without authorization, used in a promotional ad. This unauthorized use infringes on her legal rights to control her image and voice, constituting harm under the framework's category of violations of human rights or breach of legal obligations. The involvement of the AI system is explicit and central to the harm. Hence, this is an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The AI system (Lisa AI) generated synthetic images and voice of Scarlett Johansson without permission, leading to a violation of her intellectual property and personal rights. The use of AI to create and disseminate this unauthorized content directly caused harm to Johansson's rights. The legal action and removal of the advertisement confirm that harm has materialized. Hence, this is an AI Incident involving the use of AI systems causing violations of rights.

The article describes how an AI system was used to generate images and voice mimicking Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which directly leads to a violation of her intellectual property and personal rights. The harm is realized as the unauthorized advertisement was publicly shared, prompting legal action. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use directly led to a breach of rights protected under applicable law.

The article describes an AI system being used to generate a synthetic likeness of a person without consent, which constitutes a violation of intellectual property and personal rights. This unauthorized use of AI-generated content has directly led to a legal dispute, indicating harm related to rights violations. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the category of violations of human rights or breach of obligations protecting intellectual property and personal rights.

The article explicitly mentions the use of an AI system to generate synthetic voice and image of Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which directly leads to a violation of her rights. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly caused harm in terms of unauthorized use of personal likeness and voice, infringing on intellectual property and personal rights. The harm is realized, not just potential, and legal actions are underway, confirming the incident status.

The article explicitly states that an AI application generated an advertisement using Scarlett Johansson's image and voice without her consent, which is a clear violation of her rights. The AI system's use directly caused this harm. The legal action confirms the recognition of this harm. Hence, this event meets the criteria for an AI Incident due to violation of rights caused by the AI system's use.

The article describes an AI application generating images and voice of Scarlett Johansson without authorization, used in an advertisement. This unauthorized use of her likeness and voice is a violation of her rights. The AI system's use directly caused this harm, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident under violations of human rights or intellectual property rights. The legal response and removal of the ad confirm the harm has occurred.

The article explicitly mentions the use of an AI application to clone Scarlett Johansson's image and voice without consent, which was then used in an advertisement. This unauthorized use constitutes a violation of intellectual property and personality rights, fulfilling the criterion of harm under (c) violations of human rights or breach of obligations under applicable law. The AI system's use directly led to this harm, and legal actions are underway. The presence of the AI system is clear, and the harm is realized, not just potential. Hence, the event is classified as an AI Incident.

The event involves an AI system generating a synthetic image and voice of Scarlett Johansson without authorization, leading to a violation of her intellectual property and personal rights. This misuse of AI-generated content has directly caused harm to her rights, qualifying the event as an AI Incident under the framework's definition of violations of human rights or breach of intellectual property rights.

The article describes an AI system generating synthetic images and voice of a celebrity without consent, used in advertising, which is a clear violation of personal rights and intellectual property. This harm has already occurred, as evidenced by the legal action initiated by Johansson. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the direct involvement of AI in causing a rights violation harm.

The article explicitly mentions an AI system (Lisa AI) used to generate images and voice clones of Scarlett Johansson without consent, which directly led to a violation of her rights. The harm is realized, as the AI-generated content was publicly disseminated in advertising, infringing on her image and voice rights. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use directly caused a breach of intellectual property and personal rights. The legal action initiated confirms the harm has materialized.

The article describes an AI-generated voice of Scarlett Johansson used in an advertisement without her consent, which is a clear violation of her rights. The AI system's development and use directly caused this harm by creating and disseminating synthetic content that infringes on her personal rights. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the realized harm involving violation of rights through AI misuse.

The article explicitly mentions an AI system generating a voice imitation of Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which led to legal action threats. This unauthorized use of her voice is a violation of her rights and is a direct harm caused by the AI system's use. The harm is realized, not just potential, as the voice was used in a public advertisement. Hence, it meets the criteria for an AI Incident due to violation of rights through AI misuse.

The event describes an AI system generating synthetic images and voice of a real person without authorization, used in an advertisement, which directly violates the person's rights and causes reputational harm. The involvement of the AI system in producing the manipulated content is explicit, and the harm (violation of rights) has occurred, leading to legal action. This fits the definition of an AI Incident as the AI system's use has directly led to a breach of rights.

The advertisement used AI-generated images resembling Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which directly infringes on her rights to her image and likeness. The AI system (Lisa AI) was used to generate these images and voice-like audio, leading to unauthorized commercial use. This fits the definition of an AI Incident as it involves a violation of intellectual property and personal rights caused by the AI system's use. The harm is realized, not just potential, as the unauthorized advertisement was published and led to legal action.

The event involves an AI system used to generate images and voice imitations of Scarlett Johansson without her permission, which directly leads to a violation of her rights (image and voice rights). This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly caused harm in the form of unauthorized use of personal likeness and potential legal rights violations. The legal action and the described harm confirm that this is not merely a potential risk but an actual incident involving AI misuse.

The article describes how an AI system generated images and voice content of Scarlett Johansson without her consent, used in a promotional advertisement. This unauthorized use directly leads to a violation of intellectual property and personal rights, which falls under harm category (c) - violations of human rights or breach of obligations under applicable law protecting intellectual property rights. The AI system's use is central to the harm, making this an AI Incident. The legal response and ongoing dispute do not change the classification, as the harm has already occurred.

The AI system was used to generate synthetic voice and image content of Scarlett Johansson without her authorization, which directly infringes on her rights and likely violates applicable laws protecting intellectual property and personal image/voice rights. This unauthorized use and resulting legal action represent a violation of rights caused by the AI system's use, fitting the definition of an AI Incident.

The event clearly involves an AI system generating synthetic images and voice of a real person without authorization, which directly leads to a violation of intellectual property and personal rights. This fits the definition of an AI Incident as it involves harm through breach of rights caused by the use of an AI system. The harm is realized (not just potential), as the unauthorized use of Johansson's likeness and voice has already taken place and is subject to legal action.

The article explicitly mentions an AI system (Lisa AI) generating images and voice that replicate Scarlett Johansson without her permission, which has led to a lawsuit. This constitutes a violation of intellectual property and personal rights, fitting the definition of harm under (c) violations of human rights or breach of obligations protecting intellectual property rights. The AI system's use directly led to this harm, making it an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information. The mention of similar lawsuits further supports the classification as an incident involving realized harm.

The article describes an AI system (Lisa AI) that generated synthetic content using Scarlett Johansson's likeness and voice without authorization, which was used in an advertisement. This unauthorized use directly infringes on Johansson's rights and has caused harm by misrepresenting her endorsement. The involvement of AI in creating the content and the resulting legal action due to rights violations fits the definition of an AI Incident, as the AI system's use has directly led to a breach of applicable law protecting personal and intellectual property rights.

The event involves an AI system (an AI image and voice generation app) that was used to create and disseminate false content featuring Scarlett Johansson's likeness and voice without permission. This constitutes a violation of her rights, specifically intellectual property and personality rights, which falls under violations of human rights or breach of applicable law protecting fundamental rights. The harm has already occurred as the unauthorized use caused confusion and potential reputational damage. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident.

The article describes an AI system (Lisa AI) generating images and synthetic voice of Scarlett Johansson without authorization, which were used in an advertisement. This unauthorized use of her likeness and voice constitutes a violation of her rights, fulfilling the harm criteria under (c) violations of human rights or breach of obligations protecting intellectual property and personality rights. The harm is realized as the ad was published and viewed, prompting legal action. Hence, this is an AI Incident involving misuse of AI-generated content causing harm to an individual’s rights.

The event involves an AI system that generated images and voices of Scarlett Johansson without consent, leading to a legal claim. This use of AI-generated likeness infringes on intellectual property and personal rights, which falls under violations of rights as defined in the AI Incident framework. Since the harm (violation of rights) has already occurred due to the unauthorized use, this qualifies as an AI Incident.

The article describes an AI system generating images and voice mimicking Scarlett Johansson without her authorization, used in an advertisement. This unauthorized use directly violates her rights, fulfilling the criterion of harm under violations of human rights or intellectual property rights. The AI system's use is central to the incident, as it enabled the creation of synthetic media impersonating Johansson. Hence, this is an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The article explicitly mentions the use of AI-generated videos that imitate Scarlett Johansson's voice and image without permission, leading to a legal dispute. This is a clear case of an AI system's use causing a violation of rights, which fits the definition of an AI Incident under violations of intellectual property and personal rights. The harm is realized as the unauthorized use has already occurred and legal action is underway.

The use of AI-generated images of Scarlett Johansson in an advertisement without her permission constitutes a violation of her rights, specifically related to image and possibly intellectual property rights. The AI system's use directly led to harm in terms of unauthorized use of her likeness, prompting legal action. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the realized harm involving rights violations caused by the AI system's outputs.

The article describes an AI application that uses AI to create images and videos impersonating Scarlett Johansson without permission, which is a clear violation of her rights. The harm has already occurred as her image and voice were used without consent, prompting legal action. This fits the definition of an AI Incident under violations of human rights or intellectual property rights caused by the use of an AI system.

The article describes an AI system (Lisa AI) generating images and voice mimicking Scarlett Johansson without authorization, used in promotional content. This unauthorized use infringes on Johansson's rights to her image and voice, which is a breach of legal protections for personal likeness and privacy. The harm is realized as it has led to legal action and reputational harm. Hence, this is an AI Incident due to the direct involvement of AI in causing a violation of rights.

An AI system (the image generation application) was used to create images resembling Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which constitutes a violation of her rights, specifically intellectual property and personality rights. The harm is realized as it involves unauthorized use of her likeness, leading to legal action. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to violation of rights caused by the AI system's use.

The article describes an AI system that generated a fake image and voice of Scarlett Johansson without authorization, used for advertising. This unauthorized use infringes on her rights, including intellectual property and personal rights, which is a breach of applicable law protecting fundamental and intellectual property rights. The AI system's use directly caused this harm, and legal action is being pursued. Therefore, this event meets the criteria for an AI Incident.

The event explicitly involves an AI system (an AI app generating Scarlett Johansson's image) whose use has directly led to a violation of intellectual property and personal rights, which falls under harm category (c) in the AI Incident definition. The legal action taken by Johansson's team confirms the harm has materialized. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The article describes an AI application that generated a synthetic voice clone and AI-generated images of Scarlett Johansson without her consent, used in promotional material. This unauthorized use of her voice and likeness is a violation of her rights and intellectual property. The AI system's use directly caused this harm. Therefore, this event meets the criteria for an AI Incident due to realized harm involving an AI system's use leading to rights violations.

The article describes AI systems generating images of celebrities without their consent for advertising, which is a misuse of AI technology causing harm by violating personal and possibly intellectual property rights. The involvement of AI in creating these manipulated images is explicit, and the harm (violation of rights) is realized as the celebrities have taken action or warned the public. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the framework.

The event involves the use of an AI system to clone a person's image and voice, which directly relates to the development and use of AI technology. The unauthorized use of Johansson's AI-generated likeness constitutes a violation of intellectual property and privacy rights, which falls under harm category (c) - violations of human rights or breach of obligations under applicable law. Since the harm has occurred and legal action is underway, this qualifies as an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The event clearly involves an AI system that generated images and synthetic voice content resembling Scarlett Johansson. The unauthorized use of her likeness and voice in advertising constitutes a violation of her rights, specifically intellectual property and personality rights. The harm is realized as it affects Johansson's rights and potentially misleads the public. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the direct harm caused by the AI system's misuse.

The event involves an AI system (Lisa AI) that generated synthetic images and voice of Scarlett Johansson without consent, leading to a violation of her rights and unauthorized use of her likeness. This is a direct harm caused by the AI system's use, fitting the definition of an AI Incident under violations of human rights and intellectual property rights. The legal action and removal of the content confirm that harm has occurred. Therefore, this is classified as an AI Incident.

The article describes an AI system generating synthetic voice and images of Scarlett Johansson used in advertising without her authorization. This unauthorized use infringes on her rights and has led to a lawsuit, indicating realized harm. The AI system's use in creating and disseminating this content is central to the incident, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident due to violation of rights and harm to the individual involved.

The article clearly describes an AI system (Lisa AI) generating synthetic images and voice of Scarlett Johansson without permission, used in advertising, which infringes on her rights. This unauthorized use of AI-generated likeness and voice directly leads to harm in the form of violation of personal and intellectual property rights. The legal action taken by Johansson confirms the harm is realized. Additionally, the mention of deepfake scams involving other celebrities further supports the presence of AI-related harm. Hence, this event meets the criteria for an AI Incident.

The article explicitly describes the use of an AI system (Lisa AI) to generate manipulated images and voice of Scarlett Johansson without her permission, which is a direct misuse of AI technology. This misuse has caused harm in the form of violation of Johansson's rights, including privacy and possibly intellectual property rights, as the AI-generated content was used commercially without consent. The legal action taken by Johansson confirms the harm has materialized. Hence, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the category of violations of human rights or breach of legal protections.

The article describes how an AI system was used to generate Scarlett Johansson's voice and avatar without her permission, which directly leads to a violation of her rights. The use of AI-generated content in this manner constitutes harm under the category of violations of human rights or intellectual property rights. The legal action taken by Johansson confirms the harm has occurred. Therefore, this event qualifies as an AI Incident.

The article describes an AI system used to clone Scarlett Johansson's voice for promotional purposes without her authorization, leading to a lawsuit. The AI system's use directly caused a violation of Johansson's rights, specifically her voice and name being used without permission. This is a clear case of harm caused by the use of an AI system, qualifying it as an AI Incident under the framework.

The article describes an AI application that used Scarlett Johansson's voice and image without permission to create a fake advertisement. The AI system's use directly led to a violation of Johansson's rights, including unauthorized use of her identity and voice, which is a breach of intellectual property and personal rights. The harm has already occurred, and legal action is underway. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use directly caused harm through rights violations.

The article describes an AI system (Lisa AI) that generated synthetic images and voice of Scarlett Johansson without her permission, used in an online advertisement. This unauthorized use directly harms Johansson's rights, specifically privacy and publicity rights, which are protected under law. The involvement of AI in creating the synthetic content is explicit, and the harm (violation of rights) has already occurred, prompting legal action. Hence, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the framework, as the AI system's use has directly led to a breach of rights.

The article describes an AI system generating fake images and voice of Scarlett Johansson used in an advertisement without her permission, which has led to legal action. This misuse of AI directly causes harm by violating Johansson's rights and potentially misleading the public. Therefore, it qualifies as an AI Incident due to the realized harm from the AI system's use.

The article describes a clear case where an AI system was used to create and distribute synthetic voice and avatar content of a real person without consent, which is a breach of intellectual property and personal rights. This meets the criteria for an AI Incident because the AI system's use directly led to a violation of rights (a breach of obligations under applicable law protecting intellectual property and personal rights). The harm is realized, not just potential, as evidenced by the legal lawsuit filed by Scarlett Johansson. Therefore, this event qualifies as an AI Incident.

The article explicitly describes an AI system generating manipulated images and synthetic voice of Scarlett Johansson used in an advertisement without her permission. This unauthorized use infringes on her rights and is causing harm by misrepresenting her identity for commercial gain. The involvement of AI in creating the manipulated content is clear, and the harm (violation of rights) has already occurred, making this an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The article explicitly mentions an AI system generating images and dialogue impersonating Scarlett Johansson without consent, which led to legal action. This involves the use of AI-generated synthetic media causing harm through unauthorized use of likeness and voice, violating intellectual property and personal rights. The harm is realized, not just potential, as the AI-generated content was used in advertisements. Hence, it meets the criteria for an AI Incident involving violations of rights due to AI misuse.

The application uses AI to generate images and voice mimicking a real person without consent, which is a violation of intellectual property and personal rights. The involvement of AI in creating these likenesses and the resulting legal action confirm that harm has occurred due to the AI system's use. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the category of violations of human rights or breach of legal obligations protecting intellectual property rights.

The article explicitly describes an AI system generating images and voice mimicking Scarlett Johansson without permission, which is a direct violation of her rights. The use of AI-generated content to impersonate a person without consent is a clear harm under the framework, specifically a violation of human rights and intellectual property rights. The legal action taken confirms the harm has materialized. Hence, this is classified as an AI Incident.

The article describes an AI system (Convert Software's Lisa AI) that digitally manipulated Scarlett Johansson's voice and image to create an advertisement without permission. This use of AI directly led to a violation of Johansson's rights, specifically intellectual property and personality rights, which is a breach of applicable law protecting such rights. The harm is realized as the unauthorized advertisement was distributed online, causing reputational and legal harm. Hence, this is an AI Incident involving the use of AI-generated synthetic media causing rights violations.

The event explicitly involves an AI system used to generate a synthetic voice of Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which directly leads to a violation of her rights. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly caused harm in the form of unauthorized use of personal likeness and voice, infringing on intellectual property and personal rights. The legal complaint and the nature of the harm confirm this classification as an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The article describes an AI-generated video using Scarlett Johansson's likeness and voice without her permission, which is a direct violation of her rights. The AI system was used to create and disseminate this content, causing harm to the individual involved. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use directly led to a violation of rights (c) under the framework. The harm is realized, not just potential, as the unauthorized content was publicly distributed and led to legal action.

An AI system was used to generate a fake video and dialogue using Scarlett Johansson's real images without her consent, which directly breaches her rights. This unauthorized use of her likeness for commercial purposes is a violation of applicable laws protecting personal and intellectual property rights. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the realized harm of rights violation caused by the AI system's use.

The event involves an AI system (voice cloning AI) that was used without consent to generate a synthetic voice of Scarlett Johansson for commercial advertising. This unauthorized use directly violates her legal rights and privacy, constituting harm under the framework's category of violations of human rights or breach of legal obligations. The involvement of AI in generating the voice clone is explicit, and the harm is realized, not just potential. Hence, it meets the criteria for an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The event describes the use of AI-generated images and voice imitation of Scarlett Johansson without her consent in an advertisement. This unauthorized use directly violates her rights, which falls under violations of human rights or intellectual property rights as defined in the framework. Since the AI system's use has directly led to this harm, this qualifies as an AI Incident.

The article explicitly mentions an AI system generating Scarlett Johansson's voice and image without consent, which was used in a promotional video. This unauthorized use of her likeness constitutes a violation of her rights, fulfilling the criteria for harm under the AI Incident definition (violation of human rights or breach of applicable law protecting intellectual property and personal rights). The harm is realized, as the content was publicly available and led to legal action. Hence, this is an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The AI system (Lisa AI) was used to generate images and synthetic voice of Scarlett Johansson without authorization, which constitutes a violation of intellectual property and personal rights. This use directly led to harm in terms of unauthorized exploitation of her image and voice, which falls under violations of human rights and intellectual property rights. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident.

The event involves an AI system that used Scarlett Johansson's image without permission, leading to a violation of intellectual property rights. This harm falls under the category of violations of human rights or breach of obligations under applicable law protecting intellectual property rights. Since the harm has already occurred and legal action is underway, this qualifies as an AI Incident.

The event involves an AI system that generated a cloned image and voice of Scarlett Johansson without consent, directly leading to a violation of her rights (privacy and intellectual property). This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly led to harm through unauthorized representation and potential legal rights violations. The legal action confirms the harm is recognized and materialized, not just a potential risk. Therefore, this is classified as an AI Incident.

The event describes the use of an AI system to generate a synthetic voice of Scarlett Johansson without her consent in a commercial advertisement. This unauthorized use infringes on her rights and privacy, which is a breach of applicable law protecting fundamental rights. The AI system's use directly caused harm by misappropriating her voice and image, leading to a legal complaint. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the realized harm involving violation of rights through AI-generated content.

The event involves the use of an AI system (an AI application) that generated content using Scarlett Johansson's voice and face without consent, which constitutes a violation of intellectual property rights and personal rights. This is a direct harm caused by the AI system's use, fitting the definition of an AI Incident due to breach of rights under applicable law.

The AI system was used to create and disseminate synthetic content (voice and face) of a real person without permission, which is a breach of rights and likely intellectual property laws. This misuse of AI has directly led to harm in terms of violation of personal and intellectual property rights. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident under the category of violations of human rights or breach of obligations under applicable law protecting intellectual property and personal rights.

The AI system (Lisa AI) generated an avatar and voice resembling Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which is a clear violation of her intellectual property and personal rights. The harm has already occurred as the unauthorized advertisement was published and then removed following legal action. The involvement of AI in creating the unauthorized likeness and voice is explicit, and the resulting harm is a breach of rights under applicable law. Hence, this event meets the criteria for an AI Incident.

The event describes the use of an AI system to create synthetic media (deepfake-like content) that impersonates a real person without permission, leading to a violation of her rights. This is a direct harm caused by the AI system's use, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident under violations of human rights and intellectual property rights. The legal response and removal of the advertisement confirm the harm has occurred and is being addressed.

The event involves an AI system that generated synthetic images and voice of a real person without authorization, which directly led to a violation of Johansson's rights. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly caused harm in terms of rights violations. The legal case and the unauthorized use of AI-generated likeness in advertising confirm the realized harm rather than a potential one.

The event involves an AI system that generated unauthorized likeness and voice of a person, leading to a legal claim for violation of rights. The AI system's use directly caused harm in the form of unauthorized use of personal identity, which is a breach of intellectual property and personal rights. This fits the definition of an AI Incident under violations of human rights or breach of obligations under applicable law protecting fundamental and intellectual property rights.

The event clearly involves an AI system that generated synthetic voice and facial images of a real person without permission, leading to a violation of intellectual property and personal rights. This constitutes an AI Incident because the AI system's use directly led to harm (violation of rights) through unauthorized representation and potential reputational damage. The legal action and removal of the advertisement confirm the harm has materialized. Therefore, the classification is AI Incident.

The article describes a clear case where an AI system was used to generate synthetic content (voice and image) of Scarlett Johansson without her permission, which has led to a legal complaint. This constitutes a violation of intellectual property rights and personal rights, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident under the OECD framework. The AI system's use directly caused harm by unauthorized exploitation of the actor's identity, and the event is not merely a potential risk or complementary information but an actual incident with realized harm.

The event involves the use of an AI system (an AI image editor app with AI-generated voice) that has directly led to a violation of Johansson's rights by using her face and voice without consent. This is a clear case of harm related to intellectual property and personal rights, meeting the criteria for an AI Incident. The harm is realized as the unauthorized use has already occurred, prompting legal action.

The AI system Lisa AI was used to create and distribute content that impersonates a real person without authorization, which is a violation of intellectual property and personal rights. The harm is realized as the actor has taken legal action against the company, showing direct consequences from the AI-generated misuse. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use directly led to a violation of rights (harm category c).

The article discusses the use of AI in creating digital replicas of actors and the associated legal and human rights concerns, including a lawsuit filed by Scarlett Johansson. This is a discussion of rights violations related to AI use, but the article focuses on the public discourse and legal actions rather than reporting a new incident or hazard. Therefore, it fits best as Complementary Information, providing context and updates on societal and legal responses to AI-related rights issues.

The event involves the use of an AI system (an AI application generating or using the actor's face and voice) leading to a violation of intellectual property and personal rights, which is a harm under the AI Incident definition. Since the harm has occurred (unauthorized use and resulting legal action), this qualifies as an AI Incident.

The event involves an AI system (Lisa AI) that generated synthetic images and voice resembling Scarlett Johansson, used in an advertisement without her consent. This unauthorized use constitutes a violation of personal and intellectual property rights, which falls under harm category (c) "Violations of human rights or a breach of obligations under applicable law." The harm has already occurred as the advertisement was released and caused legal action. Hence, this is an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The article centers on the human rights implications of AI-generated digital replicas and unauthorized use of actors' images, which is a recognized concern. However, it does not report a specific event where AI use has directly or indirectly caused harm (AI Incident), nor does it describe a particular event where AI use could plausibly lead to harm (AI Hazard). Instead, it highlights ongoing societal responses, including strikes and international discussions, which qualify as Complementary Information under the framework because they provide context and responses to AI-related issues rather than reporting a new incident or hazard.

The AI system generated images and voice of Scarlett Johansson without authorization, which is a breach of her rights and applicable laws protecting intellectual property and personal image rights. This unauthorized use has led to legal action, indicating realized harm. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to violation of rights caused by the AI system's use.

The AI system was used to generate images and voice mimicking Scarlett Johansson without her authorization, constituting a violation of her intellectual property and personal rights. This unauthorized use of AI-generated synthetic media has directly led to legal harm and a breach of rights, fitting the definition of an AI Incident involving violations of human rights or intellectual property rights.

The article explicitly mentions the use of an AI system to replicate Johansson's voice and image without consent, which directly leads to a violation of her rights (image and voice rights). This constitutes harm under category (c) of AI Incident definitions (violations of human rights or breach of applicable law protecting fundamental and intellectual property rights). The harm is realized as the unauthorized use has already occurred, prompting legal action. Hence, this qualifies as an AI Incident rather than a hazard or complementary information.

The event explicitly involves an AI system ('Lisa AI') generating images and videos of Scarlett Johansson without authorization, which directly leads to a violation of intellectual property and personal rights. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's use has directly led to harm through unauthorized use of a person's likeness in advertising. The legal action taken by Johansson's representatives further confirms the recognition of harm caused by the AI system's outputs.

The AI system was used to create and disseminate synthetic content (image and voice) of a real person without authorization, which is a breach of intellectual property and personality rights, falling under violations of human rights or legal obligations protecting such rights. Since the unauthorized use has already occurred and led to legal action, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to realized harm related to rights violations caused by the AI system's outputs.

The article centers on policy initiatives, executive orders, and expert opinions about AI risks and governance, without reporting any concrete AI-related harm or incidents. It emphasizes the potential dangers and the need for human oversight and international cooperation, which aligns with complementary information about societal and governance responses to AI. There is no direct or indirect harm described, nor a specific AI hazard event occurring, so it does not qualify as an AI Incident or AI Hazard.

The event involves the use of AI systems (generative AI models like DALL-E, Stable Diffusion, Midjourney) and a new tool designed to interfere with their training data. However, the article does not report any realized harm caused by AI systems but rather discusses a potential method to prevent misuse of copyrighted content in AI training. The harm here is prospective, aiming to prevent intellectual property violations and unauthorized AI training. Therefore, this constitutes a plausible future risk scenario related to AI misuse and countermeasures, fitting the definition of an AI Hazard rather than an Incident or Complementary Information.

The AI application generated a synthetic likeness and voice of Scarlett Johansson without her consent, which was used in an advertisement. This unauthorized use infringes on her rights and is a clear violation of applicable laws protecting personal and intellectual property rights. The involvement of AI in generating the content is explicit, and the harm (violation of rights) has already occurred, making this an AI Incident under the framework.