LOS ANGELES, A federal case against OnlyFans has taken a dramatic twist this time, not because of salacious content or celebrity creators, but due to an unexpected AI blunder that could have serious consequences for the plaintiff’s legal team.
Court Orders Hearing on AI Misuse in Federal Filing
Attorneys representing a proposed federal class action lawsuit against Fenix International Ltd., the parent company of OnlyFans.com, are now facing potential sanctions after it was discovered they used generative AI in their legal filings leading to what the court referred to as “hallucinated citations.”
On September 4th, U.S. District Judge Fred W. Slaughter ordered the plaintiff’s lawyers to appear for an in-person hearing on September25, where they must explain why they should not be sanctioned under Rule11 and the court's inherent authority for allegedly misusing artificial intelligence in official documents.
From Chatter Agencies to RICO Claims
The lawsuit stems from claims that OnlyFans and certain“ chatter agencies” misled users by employing professional impersonators to manage creator accounts. These agencies, hired by top content creators, allegedly engaged in deceptive interactions with subscribers posing as the creators themselves to boost engagement and income.
The lawsuit accuses the defendants of civil fraud and violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, typically used in cases involving organized crime but permissible in civil cases alleging corporate corruption.
“Save the Fans” Campaign Ignites Legal Drama
The case gained momentum through a social media campaign titled “Save the Fans,” spearheaded by attorney Robert B. Carey of Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP. The campaign criticized the rise of AI-driven and outsourced messaging that replaced genuine interaction between creators and subscribers.
But as the case advanced, defense attorneys for OnlyFans pushed back highlighting that some of the plaintiffs' legal filings included inaccurate or completely fabricated citations, a red flag often tied to unchecked use of AI-generated content.
When AI Crosses the Line
One of the attorneys admitted to being overwhelmed and under personal stress, leading them to rely on generative AI tools to draft parts of the court filings. When discrepancies were flagged, the plaintiffs’ legal team requested leave to amend the filings but OnlyFans’ attorneys firmly objected.
Now, the judge is weighing whether the conduct warrants formal penalties.
What This Means for the Industry
This case is a cautionary tale for the legal world and digital platforms alike. As AI tools become more integrated into workflows, transparency, verification, and accountability are critical especially in high-stakes litigation involving billion-dollar platforms like OnlyFans.
The upcoming hearing may set a legal precedent on the boundaries of AI use in federal courts, marking a pivotal moment in how artificial intelligence intersects with justice.
