Class Action Lawsuit Targets Grammarly’s AI ‘Expert Review’ Feature
Grammarly, the popular writing software created by Superhuman, is currently facing a class action lawsuit over its AI feature known as “Expert Review.” This tool allowed Grammarly to present editing suggestions under the names of well-known authors and experts, sparking controversy after it was revealed that these individuals had not consented to be associated with the service.
Details of the Lawsuit
The lawsuit was filed in the Southern District of New York and names Julia Angwin, an investigative journalist and founder of The Markup, as the sole plaintiff. While the suit does not specify a monetary request, damages for the collective plaintiff class are estimated to exceed $5 million.
The complaint highlights Grammarly’s alleged misappropriation of the names of numerous established figures, which Angwin argues undermines their rights and due respects. It points out the ethical concern regarding the representation of both living and deceased individuals in a commercial context without their approval.
Key Individuals Involved
- Julia Angwin: Lead plaintiff and founder of The Markup.
- Stephen King: Notable author whose name was featured in the AI tool.
- Neil deGrasse Tyson: Renowned astrophysicist also mentioned in the context.
- Ailian Gan: Director of product management at Superhuman.
- Shishir Mehrotra: CEO of Superhuman.
Controversy Surrounding the “Expert Review” Feature
The “Expert Review” feature offered users insights as if they were receiving critiques from celebrated authors. Despite a disclaimer stating that those named had not endorsed the tool, many writers expressed their frustration. They argued that this usage misrepresented their work and likenesses within an AI framework.
Amid growing public dissent, Superhuman announced the discontinuation of the “Expert Review” feature. Gan indicated that the company would reassess the tool’s implementation to ensure experts have control over their representation in the future.
Legal Implications
Angwin’s attorney, Peter Romer-Friedman, emphasizes that both New York and California laws prohibit using a person’s name or likeness for commercial purposes without consent. He described the legal standing of the case as “straightforward” and aims to confront the broader implications of unauthorized name appropriation in the tech industry.
In response, Superhuman’s CEO asserted that the company will defend against the lawsuit, deeming the claims to be without merit. He acknowledged the need for a more respectful approach when integrating experts into Grammarly’s platform moving forward.
Conclusion
This lawsuit underscores growing concerns about intellectual property rights and ethical practices regarding AI applications. As technology continues to evolve, the framework governing the use of individuals’ identities and contributions in commercial products will likely face further scrutiny.
