Grammarly Disables AI Impersonation Tool After Backlash, Lawsuit
- tech360.tv
- 2 hours ago
- 3 min read
Grammarly has disabled an artificial intelligence (AI) feature which mimicked personas of prominent writers, including Stephen King and scientist Carl Sagan. The writing tool took down the function following a backlash from individuals whose identities were impersonated.
The "Expert Review" feature offered writing feedback "inspired by" the styles of famous authors and academics. Superhuman, the tech firm which runs Grammarly, removed the feature this week.
Writers met the feature with resistance, including a multi-million dollar lawsuit, after finding their names and reputations used as "AI personas" without their consent. Chief Executive Shishir Mehrotra apologised on LinkedIn, acknowledging the tool had "misrepresented" the voices of experts.
Investigative journalist Julia Angwin, a New York Times contributing opinion writer, is the lead plaintiff in a class-action lawsuit filed against Superhuman and Grammarly in the Southern District of New York. The suit was lodged in the Southern District of New York.
Angwin told the BBC she was 'stunned' to find her professional identity being marketed as a commercial product. She said she had considered deepfakes as something that primarily happened to celebrities around images.
Editing is her livelihood, Angwin noted, but she had never thought of anyone trying to steal it. The legal filing alleges the tech firm misappropriated the identities of "hundreds" of writers to drive profits for its paid subscription service.
According to Angwin’s lawyer, Peter Romer-Friedman, the case has already seen significant momentum. He said over 40 people had contacted them within 24 hours of the suit’s filing.
Romer-Friedman described the company's actions as a "brazen violation of the law." The lawsuit argues it is unlawful to use names for commercial purposes without consent.
It also seeks to stop the platform from attributing advice to experts that they "never gave." The filing states that damages exceed USD 5 million (£3.7 million).
Romer-Friedman noted this is a minimum jurisdictional requirement, with the true figure to be calculated based on the firm's earnings from the tool. Angwin described the quality of the AI's output as a "slopperganger," referencing content described on social media as "AI slop."
The edits attributed to her were making sentences worse and more complex, she said. Angwin found the idea of her name giving terrible advice "really appalling."
Grammarly was founded in 2009 as a writing-review tool and began integrating a suite of generative-AI tools in Aug. 2025. The Expert Review function appears to have launched without the named famous personas, which were introduced later.
Although the company began rebranding to Superhuman in Oct., Grammarly was kept as the name of its main service. Superhuman initially stated it would maintain the feature but allow those named to "opt-out" as criticism mounted in recent days, according to The Verge.
Gaming journalist Wes Fenlon, whose persona was used in the tool, wrote on BlueSky that 'Opt-out via email' was a 'laughably inadequate recourse for selling a product that verges on impersonation and profits on unearned credibility.' Romer-Friedman argued the burden of consent should never have been on the writers.
Mehrotra said the company received "valid critical feedback" from experts concerned about misrepresentation. This kind of scrutiny improves products, and the company takes it seriously, he stated.
The chief executive said the AI agent had drawn on 'publicly available information from third-party LLMs' to surface writing suggestions inspired by the published work of influential voices. Mehrotra apologised, adding, "We hear the feedback and recognise we fell short on this."
Responding to the lawsuit, Mehrotra told the BBC that Expert Review was being taken down for a redesign before the claim was filed. He stated that in its short lifespan, it had "very little usage."
"We are sorry, and we will rethink our approach going forward," Mehrotra said. However, he added that the legal claims within the lawsuit are "without merit" and the company will "strongly defend against them."
The firm is working on a "better approach to bringing experts onto our platform" in a way that will benefit both users and experts, he explained.
Grammarly disabled its "Expert Review" AI feature after a backlash and a multi-million dollar lawsuit.
The tool mimicked the writing styles of prominent figures, including Stephen King and Carl Sagan, without consent.
Investigative journalist Julia Angwin is the lead plaintiff in a class-action lawsuit against Superhuman and Grammarly.
Source: BBC
