Grammarly Faces Lawsuit Over AI 'Expert Review' Feature

Superhuman, the company behind the writing assistance platform Grammarly, is confronting a class-action lawsuit filed in the Southern District of New York. The legal action centers on Grammarly's now-discontinued AI-powered "Expert Review" feature, which allegedly used the names and identities of numerous public figures without their consent.

Investigative journalist Julia Angwin initiated the lawsuit, claiming that Grammarly commercially exploited the reputations of hundreds of writers, authors, and journalists. The complaint asserts that the AI tool presented editing suggestions as if they were endorsed by prominent individuals, including Angwin herself, author Stephen King, and astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson.

Allegations of Unauthorized Use

The core of the complaint is that Grammarly's "Expert Review" feature, introduced last year as part of its AI widget suite, leveraged these names to generate profit. Despite a disclaimer indicating that the named individuals had not participated in or endorsed the tool, the lawsuit argues that this commercial use of their identities and likenesses constitutes a violation of New York and California state laws.

Legal documents indicate that the plaintiff class is seeking damages exceeding $5 million. This legal challenge underscores increasing scrutiny over how artificial intelligence technologies utilize personal data and intellectual property without explicit permission.

Feature Discontinuation and Industry Response

Grammarly's parent company, Superhuman, had already deactivated the "Expert Review" feature prior to the lawsuit's filing. This decision followed public criticism and backlash regarding the tool's operation and its implications for intellectual property rights and personal branding.

Ailian Gan, Grammarly's Director for Product Management, previously stated that the company intended to "reimagine the feature." The goal was to develop a revised version that would grant experts greater control over how their identities and contributions are represented within the platform's AI functionalities. This incident reflects a broader industry challenge as AI developers navigate ethical considerations and legal frameworks surrounding content generation and attribution.

Broader Implications for AI Development

The lawsuit highlights a growing legal and ethical debate concerning the unauthorized use of individuals' identities and creative works by AI systems. As AI capabilities advance, questions of consent, intellectual property, and fair compensation for creators whose work may be used to train or enhance these technologies are becoming increasingly prominent.

This case could set a precedent for how AI companies are held accountable for the commercial application of public figures' names and likenesses. It also emphasizes the need for clear guidelines and regulations to govern the development and deployment of AI tools, particularly those that interact with or simulate human expertise and identity.

Implications

Country Impact: The lawsuit, filed in the Southern District of New York, could influence legal interpretations of identity and likeness rights under New York and California laws, potentially impacting future AI development and deployment across the United States.

Industry Impact: The technology and AI industries face increased pressure to establish clear ethical guidelines and consent mechanisms for using public figures' identities. This case may prompt a re-evaluation of how AI features are designed and marketed, particularly those that simulate expert endorsement.

Market Impact: Companies developing AI tools may experience heightened legal risks and compliance costs. This could lead to more cautious product development cycles and increased investment in legal counsel to navigate intellectual property and privacy concerns, potentially affecting market innovation and investor confidence in certain AI ventures.