A new class action lawsuit alleges that Grammarly's parent company, Superhuman, crossed a legal and ethical line with its latest AI feature. The tool, called 'Expert Review,' was marketed to premium subscribers as a way to receive simulated editorial feedback from hundreds of notable figures, including authors, scientists, and journalists, without their knowledge or consent.

Journalist Julia Angwin, who built her career investigating digital privacy, is leading the suit. She argues the company violated the publicity rights of those it impersonated. 'I am distressed to discover that a tech company is selling an imposter version of my hard-earned expertise,' Angwin stated.

The feature, which has since been disabled, promised premium feedback but often delivered generic commentary. Tech newsletter editor Casey Newton tested it, receiving bland advice from a bot mimicking journalist Kara Swisher. When Newton shared the output with the real Swisher, her response was unequivocal: 'You rapacious information and identity thieves better get ready for me to go full McConaughey on you. Also, you suck.'

In a LinkedIn post, Superhuman CEO Shishir Mehrotra apologized but defended the feature's concept, suggesting it could help experts build a 'ubiquitous bond' with users. For the writers whose identities were used, the bond felt more like theft.

Source: TechCrunch