Grammarly Disables AI Feature After Lawsuit

Grammarly, a prominent writing assistance platform, has deactivated its "Expert Review" artificial intelligence function. This action follows a class-action lawsuit initiated on March 13, 2026, in the Southern District of New York, alleging unauthorized use of individuals' identities. The feature, which offered editing suggestions mimicking the styles of well-known authors and academics, is at the center of the legal dispute.

Legal Challenge to AI Feature

The lawsuit targets Superhuman, Grammarly's parent company, seeking damages exceeding $5 million. Plaintiffs contend that the commercial application of a person's name and professional persona without explicit consent constitutes an unlawful act. Investigative journalist Julia Angwin is the lead plaintiff, asserting that her identity and professional expertise were used without authorization to generate AI-driven feedback.

Company Response and Feature Details

Grammarly's "Expert Review" feature, launched in August 2025, was designed to provide users with "subject-matter expertise and personalized, topic-specific feedback" by leveraging generative AI. It aimed to emulate the writing styles and critical approaches of figures such as Stephen King, Neil deGrasse Tyson, and Carl Sagan.

The company's CEO, Shishir Mehrotra, issued an apology on LinkedIn, acknowledging concerns about the misrepresentation of expert voices and indicating a reevaluation of the company's strategy.

Broader Implications for AI Ethics

Despite the apology, Mehrotra has publicly stated that the legal claims lack merit and that Superhuman intends to vigorously defend against them. This incident highlights growing legal and ethical challenges surrounding the use of generative AI, particularly concerning intellectual property, personal rights, and the commercialization of digital identities. The case could establish precedents for how AI models are trained and how they attribute or simulate human expertise.

Industry Scrutiny and Future Outlook

The legal action against Grammarly underscores increasing scrutiny on AI developers regarding data sourcing and ethical deployment. Companies integrating generative AI into their products face a complex landscape of evolving legal frameworks and public expectations. The outcome of this lawsuit may influence future development and deployment strategies for AI-powered tools across various industries, particularly those that leverage public figures' personas or creative works.

This situation reflects a broader industry trend where the rapid advancement of AI technology is outpacing the establishment of clear legal and ethical guidelines, leading to potential conflicts over intellectual property and personal rights.

Implications

Country Impact: The lawsuit, filed in the U.S., could set a legal precedent for intellectual property and personal rights in the context of generative AI, influencing future legislation and court decisions regarding AI development and deployment within the United States.

Industry Impact: The AI industry faces increased pressure to develop ethical guidelines and robust consent mechanisms for using public personas or creative works in AI training. This case may lead to stricter compliance requirements and a reevaluation of AI product features across the sector.

Market Impact: Companies utilizing generative AI may experience heightened legal risks and potential financial liabilities, impacting investor confidence and valuation. The incident could also spur demand for AI solutions with transparent data sourcing and ethical design, shifting market preferences.