Grammarly AI Features Prompt $5M Lawsuit and Broken Text Bug Backlash

Paying subscribers realized something was wrong when simple web comments began turning into duplicated walls of text. For at least six months leading up to early 2026, typing a paragraph with the Grammarly browser extension active on sites like Reddit frequently triggered random line deletions. Sometimes, entire sentences copied themselves into a garbled, unusable mess.

While the basic text-editing engine visibly degraded, parent company Superhuman prioritized shipping new Grammarly AI features. That pivot has now triggered a massive legal backlash. In March 2026, investigative journalist Julia Angwin filed a class action lawsuit against Superhuman Platform, Inc. in the Southern District of New York. The core allegation targets an AI rollout that turned famous writers into unauthorized digital editors.

The collision of an actively breaking core product with a legally questionable AI expansion offers a clear look at where writing assistant software stands right now. Users want to know how to stop their text from disappearing, how to manage their subscriptions, and what this lawsuit means for their data.

Resolving the Bugs Overshadowed by Grammarly AI Features

Before dealing with the legal drama, users need a functional keyboard. The immediate pain point for anyone relying on this tool is the catastrophic failure of the browser plugin on specific websites. The bug involves aggressive text duplication and dropped lines, mostly occurring in modern rich-text input boxes.

The root cause lies in how the extension overlays its corrections onto dynamic web elements. When you type faster than the local script can sync, or when you accept a correction, the script conflicts with the website's native editor. The result is vanishing text or repeated phrases that ruin your entire draft.

If you are dealing with the Grammarly text duplication bug right now, you have three immediate paths:

1. Disable the Extension Per-Domain Do not try to force your way through the glitch. If you are typing on Reddit or a similar forum, click the green extension icon in your browser toolbar and toggle off the "Check for grammar on this site" option. You will lose the spell check, but your text will stop deleting itself.

2. Turn off Beta AI Settings Go into your main account dashboard and manually opt out of any experimental generative text tools. The integration of Grammarly AI features often pulls excessive system resources and exacerbates syncing conflicts in the browser DOM.

3. Cut the Financial Bleed Many users in technical forums have made the exact same choice: canceling their annual auto-renewals. The Pro version costs $12 a month or $144 a year. If you spend that money only to watch your text vanish while the company funds unasked-for generative tools, downgrading to the free version stops the financial drain. To do this, navigate to your Account settings, hit Subscription, and follow the cancellation prompts until you receive an email confirmation.

The $5 Million Grammarly Superhuman Lawsuit

While users wrestled with basic software bugs, the product team was building "Expert Review." This feature, bundled into the Pro subscription, claimed to offer users writing feedback in the voice of famous journalists, authors, and thinkers.

The system ran on large language models instructed to adopt specific personas. You could write a draft and ask the software to review it as Stephen King, Kara Swisher, Timnit Gebru, or Carl Sagan. The names were explicitly used to sell the perceived value of the Grammarly AI features.

The problem is that Superhuman never asked these people for permission.

In her filing (Case 26 Civ. 02005-JGK), Julia Angwin targets the financial exploitation of professional identities. The lawsuit seeks more than $5 million in damages. This legal action highlights a specific kind of intellectual property theft. The software wasn't just analyzing text; it was explicitly wrapping its generic automated feedback in the stolen credibility of real experts.

To prove the absurdity of the system, critics tested the Expert Review AI with "Lorem ipsum" placeholder text. Instead of recognizing the gibberish, the underlying language model generated earnest writing advice and stamped a famous author's name on it. The software simply hallucinated feedback because the system design mandated an output.

The Legal Vulnerability in Grammarly AI Features

This lawsuit bypasses traditional copyright arguments and targets the Right of Publicity. Both New York and California maintain strict laws preventing companies from using a person's name, likeness, or voice for commercial gain without prior consent.

Using an author's books to train an AI model creates a massive copyright fight over fair use. Using that author's actual name to market a premium software feature is a direct violation of state commercial identity laws. Superhuman packaged the names of living, working writers into a $144-a-year software product. The legal vulnerability here is distinct and much harder for a tech company to dismiss as "transformative use."

Following immediate public backlash from the affected writers, Superhuman CEO Shishir Mehrotra disabled the feature. He posted an apology on LinkedIn, though he maintained that the underlying concept of connecting experts to users digitally remains sound. Turning off the servers does not erase the legal liability of having commercialized those names in the first place.

The Julia Angwin Class Action and User Recourse

The lawsuit initiated by Angwin, represented by Peter Romer-Friedman Law PLLC, seeks class-action status. This means other journalists, editors, and public figures whose names were scraped and stuffed into the Expert Review dropdown menu can petition the court to be included as plaintiffs.

Discussions in technical communities have immediately zeroed in on the reality of class-action mechanics. Software users and tech workers frequently point out that joining a massive class action usually results in millions of dollars for the law firms and pennies for the actual class members.

Writers who discover their names were used without permission face a strategic choice. They can do nothing and wait to see if the Romer-Friedman class action secures a broad payout. Alternatively, individuals hold the right to explicitly opt out of a certified class action to sue Superhuman directly in local courts. In many jurisdictions, statutory damages for Right of Publicity violations offer higher individual payouts in small claims or civil court than what trickles down from a massive settlement fund.

How AI Writing Assistant Bugs Reveal Product Misalignment

The situation reveals a harsh disconnect between user expectations and corporate roadmaps. People install writing assistants to fix missing commas, catch passive voice, and prevent typos. They expect an invisible utility.

Instead of refining that utility, the development budget went toward turning the software into an unprompted ghostwriter. The focus shifted from repairing the core text input mechanics to scraping the internet for personality traits.

The deterioration of the core product makes the ambition of the AI expansion look ridiculous. A system that cannot reliably capture keystrokes in a Reddit comment box has no business attempting to synthesize the literary voice of a legendary novelist. The technical debt accumulated by ignoring the text duplication bugs was ignored in favor of shipping the Expert Review AI.

When a company believes it can replace a degrading base product with unauthorized impersonations of talented people, it fundamentally misunderstands what users are willing to buy. The $144 yearly fee looks increasingly difficult to justify when the software actively fights against the person typing the words.

FAQs

How do I fix the Grammarly text duplication bug?

The fastest way to stop text from duplicating or disappearing is to disable the browser extension on the specific website causing issues. Click the extension icon in your toolbar and toggle off the site permissions. Alternatively, disabling experimental generative features in your account settings can reduce script conflicts.

What is the $5 million lawsuit against Grammarly's parent company?

In March 2026, journalist Julia Angwin filed a class-action lawsuit against Superhuman Platform, Inc. The suit claims the company used the names of famous writers without consent to power its "Expert Review" feature. The lawsuit seeks damages for violating state laws regarding the right of publicity.

What exactly did the Expert Review AI do?

This feature allowed premium subscribers to receive automated writing feedback written in the simulated voice of real-life experts, authors, and journalists. It utilized large language models to generate this advice. It functioned even on meaningless placeholder text, generating fake professional advice without the actual author's input.

Can I get a refund if I cancel my Grammarly subscription?

Generally, canceling an annual subscription stops the auto-renewal for the next billing cycle but does not automatically trigger a prorated refund for the current year. Users frustrated by persistent AI writing assistant bugs must downgrade to the free tier through their account dashboard to ensure they are no longer billed.

Are other authors involved in the Julia Angwin class action?

The lawsuit seeks to represent a broader class of journalists, academics, and writers whose identities were commercialized without authorization. Authors affected by the unauthorized AI models can choose to join the class represented by the filing law firm or opt out to pursue individual legal action.