A writer is suing Grammarly for turning her and other authors into

Journalist Julia Angwin has filed a class action lawsuit against Superhuman, the parent company of AI writing assistant Grammarly, alleging that its new "Expert Review" feature used her name and likeness, along with hundreds of other prominent individuals, without consent. The controversial feature, released last week, employed artificial intelligence to simulate editorial feedback, making it appear as though users were receiving critiques from famous personalities such as novelist Stephen King, the late scientist Carl Sagan, or tech journalist Kara Swisher. Angwin’s legal action argues that Grammarly violated her and other affected writers' privacy and publicity rights by commercializing their expertise without permission.

Grammarly’s "Expert Review" tool, available exclusively to subscribers paying $144 annually, claimed to offer thoughtful critiques from an AI approximation of these experts. However, the company failed to secure consent from the numerous individuals whose identities were integrated into the feature. This omission forms the core of Angwin’s class action suit, which allows other writers who were similarly impersonated to join her legal challenge against Superhuman.

Angwin, who has dedicated her career to investigating the impact of technology companies on privacy, voiced her distress over the situation. "I have worked for decades honing my skills as a writer and editor, and I am distressed to discover that a tech company is selling an imposter version of my hard-earned expertise," she stated. The irony of a leading privacy advocate becoming a victim of such an infringement was not lost on observers. Renowned AI ethicist Timnit Gebru, another prominent critic of AI technology, was also among those included in Grammarly’s unconsented "Expert Review" roster.

Despite its premium pricing, the "Expert Review" feature predictably fell short of delivering on its promise of insightful feedback. Casey Newton, founder and editor of the tech newsletter Platformer, who was also impersonated by the tool, put one of his own articles through Grammarly’s approximation of tech journalist Kara Swisher. The AI-generated critique was remarkably generic, prompting questions about the rationale behind using specific writers' likenesses if the feedback lacked depth.

Newton shared the AI-generated "feedback" from the simulated Kara Swisher: "Could you briefly compare how daily AI users versus AI skeptics articulate risk, creating a through-line readers can follow?" He subsequently relayed this message to the real Kara Swisher. Her candid response underscored the outrage felt by those whose identities were misappropriated: "You rapacious information and identity thieves better get ready for me to go full McConaughey on you," Swisher texted Newton, referring to Grammarly. She added emphatically, "Also, you suck."

Following the widespread outcry and the initiation of legal proceedings, Grammarly has since disabled the "Expert Review" feature. Superhuman CEO Shishir Mehrotra confirmed the change in a LinkedIn post, offering an apology for the controversy. However, Mehrotra also defended the underlying concept behind the feature. He articulated a vision where users could benefit from the simulated guidance of various professionals, writing, "Imagine your professor sharpening your essay, your sales leader reshaping a customer pitch, a thoughtful critic challenging your arguments, or a leading expert elevating your proposal." He further suggested that such a feature offered experts "a chance to build that same ubiquitous bond with users, much like Grammarly has."

This lawsuit highlights growing concerns about the ethical implications of artificial intelligence and the commercial use of individuals' intellectual property and public personas without explicit consent. The outcome of Angwin’s class action could establish significant precedents for how tech companies are permitted to leverage real-world identities and expertise in the development and marketing of AI-powered tools, particularly as AI capabilities continue to advance rapidly across various industries.

FAQ

Q: What is the "Expert Review" feature that led to the lawsuit?

A: The "Expert Review" feature was a Grammarly tool that used AI to simulate editorial feedback, making it seem like users were getting critiques from famous personalities like Stephen King, Carl Sagan, or Kara Swisher. It was available to premium subscribers.

Q: Why is Grammarly facing a class action lawsuit?

A: Grammarly's parent company, Superhuman, is being sued by journalist Julia Angwin on behalf of herself and other affected writers. The lawsuit alleges that the company violated their privacy and publicity rights by using their names and likenesses in the "Expert Review" feature without obtaining consent.

Q: What was Grammarly's response after the controversy emerged?

A: Grammarly disabled the "Expert Review" feature. Superhuman CEO Shishir Mehrotra issued an apology but also reiterated his belief in the concept behind the feature, envisioning it as a way for experts to connect with users.