Grammarly, which acquired email productivity app Superhuman, has been using the real names and professional identities of published authors and journalists to power an "Expert Review" feature — without asking for their permission first. The feature presents AI-generated editorial feedback styled as coming from a named human expert, lending the tool a credibility it derives from real people's reputations without their knowledge or consent.

The issue came to light when journalists at The Verge discovered their names were being used by the product. Grammarly's response has been to offer an opt-out mechanism, meaning affected individuals must actively remove themselves rather than having been asked to participate in the first place. Critics argue that opt-out is an inadequate standard when a person's professional identity and reputation are being commercially exploited.

The incident follows a broader pattern of AI products using real people's identities, writing styles, or likenesses as training data or product features without explicit consent, and it is drawing renewed attention to gaps in existing privacy and intellectual property law in this area.

What This Means for Your Business

This case has direct implications for any organization that uses third-party AI tools that incorporate human expert personas, reviewer names, or stylistic profiles. If your employees' names, professional identities, or work outputs are being used to power AI features in tools your company licenses, that is a liability and reputational question your legal team should examine. It also reinforces the importance of reading AI product terms carefully — particularly around how user data and identity are used in product features, not just model training.