Dailyhunt
Grammarly removes AI feature which used real authors identities, faces class action lawsuit

Grammarly removes AI feature which used real authors identities, faces class action lawsuit

Mashable 3 weeks ago

Grammarly has pulled its AI-powered Expert Review feature after being called out for usingjournalists' and authors' identities without permission. The writing assistant software is now facing a class action lawsuit accusing it of exploiting writers' names for its own profit.

SEE ALSO:Grammarly announces 'Superhuman' rebrand as it doubles down on AI

Launched alongside seven other AI agents last August, Expert Review was available on Grammarly's Free and $12 Pro plans at launch, and was promoted as providing users with feedback on the content of their writing. A page on Grammarly's website which has since been taken down stated that Expert Review "[drew] on insights from subject-matter experts and trusted publications," and provided AI-generated feedback "based on publicly available expert content" (via Wayback Machine). Users could even personalise which "expert" sources Grammarly drew from by selecting the names of specific authors.

"Expert Review agent offers subject-matter expertise and personalized, topic-specific feedback to elevate writing that meets rigorous academic or professional standards tailored to the user's field," Grammarly wrote in its blog post announcing the feature.

Grammarly's Expert Review came to attention last week after Wired reported that the feature was offering AI-generated edits in the name of real writers and academics, both living and dead. The tool's user guide does provide the disclaimer that its references to experts "are for informational purposes only and do not indicate any affiliation with Grammarly or endorsement by those individuals or entities." However, the same page also claims that Expert Review offers "insights from leading professionals, authors, and subject-matter experts."

Many said subject-matter experts have not taken kindly to Grammarly using their identities without their knowledge or consent.

"[Grammarly] curated a list of real people, gave its models free rein to hallucinate plausible-sounding advice on their behalf, and put it all behind a subscription," wrote Platformer founder Casey Newton, who was among those invoked by Grammarly. That's a deliberate choice to monetize the identities of real people without involving them, and it sucks."

"This has got to be some kind of defamation or something," historian Mar Hicks posted to Bluesky, having shared a screenshot of their identity being included in Expert Review. "You can’t just steal people’s IP and then pretend they’re saying something they never said."

Grammarly responds to Expert Review backlash

Dailyhunt
Disclaimer: This content has not been generated, created or edited by Dailyhunt. Publisher: Mashable