Grammarly Criticized for Imitating Authors Without Consent

⚡

Key Takeaways

1Grammarly launched a controversial AI feature that simulates feedback from famous authors without their consent.

2Julia Angwin filed a class action lawsuit against Superhuman, accusing the company of privacy violations.

3The feature, criticized for its generic feedback, was disabled by Grammarly after negative reactions.

💡Why it matters — This case raises questions about the unauthorized use of digital identity by tech companies.

Grammarly and Its Controversial Feature

Grammarly recently introduced a feature called "Expert Review," which uses artificial intelligence to simulate editorial feedback. This new addition gives the impression that renowned figures such as writer Stephen King, scientist Carl Sagan, or tech journalist Kara Swisher have personally reviewed your writing. However, Grammarly did not obtain permission from the hundreds of experts whose names it uses.

A Class Action Led by Julia Angwin

Julia Angwin, a prominent journalist, has decided to respond by filing a class action lawsuit against Superhuman, the parent company of Grammarly. She accuses the company of violating the privacy and publicity rights of the authors being imitated. Angwin, who has dedicated her career to investigating the impact of technology on privacy, expressed her dismay at this unauthorized use of her expertise. "I have spent decades honing my skills as a writer and editor, and I am appalled to discover that a tech company is selling a counterfeit version of my hard-earned expertise," she stated.

Inclusion of AI Critics

The situation is even more ironic given that other critics of this type of technology, such as Timnit Gebru, a renowned AI ethicist, have also been included in Grammarly's "expert review." This inclusion raises questions about the ethics and legality of using digital identities without consent.

Widespread Criticism and a Disabled Feature

The "Expert Review" feature, offered to subscribers paying $144 per year, has been criticized for providing feedback deemed generic and irrelevant. Casey Newton, founder of the tech newsletter Platformer, experimented with the tool and received comments from the AI mimicking Kara Swisher, which turned out to be disappointing. Grammarly's imitation of Swisher produced "feedback" so generic that it raises the question of why the company would bother using the likenesses of these writers in the first place.

In response to the criticism, Superhuman CEO Shishir Mehrotra announced on LinkedIn that the feature had been disabled. While he issued an apology, Mehrotra defended the concept of the tool, highlighting its potential to create a connection between experts and users. "Imagine your teacher refining your essay, your sales manager reshaping a client pitch, a thoughtful critic challenging your arguments, or a leading expert elevating your proposal," he wrote.

Reactions from Imitated Personalities

Kara Swisher, whose identity was used without permission, reacted strongly. She expressed her outrage in a message relayed to Casey Newton, calling the initiative "theft of information and identity" and threatening to take legal action against Grammarly. "You, information and identity thieves, better be prepared for me to come at you hard," Swisher texted Newton. "Also, you suck."