Full Breakdown
Grammarly Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over AI Tool Misusing Expert Identities
3/12/2026, 10:32:38 PM
Controversial AI Feature Sparks Legal Action
Grammarly, the writing assistant platform developed by Superhuman, is facing a class action lawsuit following the discontinuation of its "Expert Review" feature. This AI tool, which launched in late 2025, generated editing suggestions by mimicking the writing styles of well-known authors and academics, including Stephen King and Neil deGrasse Tyson, without their consent. The lawsuit, filed by investigative journalist Julia Angwin in the Southern District of New York, alleges that Grammarly misappropriated the names and identities of numerous professionals to profit from its services, with damages claimed to exceed $5 million.
Background of the Expert Review Tool
The Expert Review feature was designed to provide users with feedback inspired by established writers and intellectuals. However, it faced immediate backlash from the writing community, as many individuals discovered their identities were used without permission. Critics described the tool as a form of "digital impersonation," raising ethical concerns about the commercialization of personal identities in AI applications. Angwin's lawsuit highlights a broader issue regarding the unauthorized use of professional identities in technology, which could set a precedent for future cases involving AI ethics.
Official Statements & Responses
In response to the backlash, Superhuman CEO Shishir Mehrotra acknowledged the missteps associated with the Expert Review tool. He stated, "We received valid critical feedback from experts who are concerned that the agent misrepresented their voices... After careful consideration, we have decided to disable Expert Review while we reimagine the feature." The company aims to rebuild the tool with a focus on explicit consent and control over how experts are represented.
Angwin's attorney, Peter Romer-Friedman, emphasized that existing laws in New York and California prohibit the commercial use of a person's name and likeness without their permission. He stated, "Legally, we think it's a pretty straightforward case," underscoring the legal implications of the lawsuit.
Criticism & Opposition
The lawsuit has garnered support from various writers and academics who feel their identities have been exploited. John Kaag, a professor at the University of Massachusetts Lowell, criticized Grammarly's approach, arguing that it misrepresented the voices of experts and blurred the line between human expertise and AI-generated content. He noted that the tool's design implied endorsement or participation from those whose identities were used, which was never agreed upon.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
While the lawsuit does not specify a fixed amount in damages, it asserts that the total claims exceed $5 million. Some sources indicate that the feature was initially defended by Grammarly, which suggested allowing named individuals to opt-out. However, the overwhelming criticism led to the feature's abrupt discontinuation on the same day the lawsuit was filed, raising questions about the company's initial commitment to the tool.
What's Next
As the legal proceedings unfold, the case will likely prompt discussions about the ethical use of AI in commercial applications and the rights of individuals whose identities are used without consent. Superhuman's commitment to reimagining the Expert Review feature may lead to new standards for consent and compensation in AI-driven platforms, reflecting a growing awareness of the need for ethical practices in technology.
