Grammarly's AI expert reviews use likenesses of real authors without permission
Grammarly has introduced an "expert review" feature that simulates writing feedback from real academics and authors, including deceased figures like Carl Sagan and William Zinsser, without their permission or endorsement. The feature uses AI trained on these individuals' works to provide suggestions, raising significant ethical and legal concerns about consent and the use of scholars' intellectual property.
Grammarly, now operating under parent company Superhuman, has expanded its writing assistance platform to include an "expert review" option that offers simulated critiques attributed to real scholars and authors. The feature allows users to receive feedback styled after living writers such as Stephen King and Neil deGrasse Tyson, as well as deceased figures including Carl Sagan, William Zinsser, and historian David Abulafia.
The company states that these AI agents are trained on the works of the people they imitate and provide suggestions "inspired" by their scholarship, with a disclaimer noting that the experts have no affiliation with Grammarly or endorsement of the feature. However, critics argue this approach represents a fundamental ethical violation. Vanessa Heggie, an associate professor at the University of Birmingham, characterized the practice as "creating little LLMs" based on "scraped work" of the living and deceased, trading on their names and reputations without consent. C.E. Aubin, a historian at Yale University, stated that the system validates widespread mistrust of AI in academia, describing it as "insulting" to scholars whose work is being used without participation or permission.
Beyond ethical concerns, questions remain about the effectiveness of Grammarly's AI tools and their impact on academic integrity. Teachers have reported difficulty managing AI-written essays from students, and the introduction of expert-styled reviews may further blur lines between legitimate proofreading and academic misconduct, potentially contributing to erosion of institutional oversight in educational settings.