Lawyers Seek Permission to Correct AI-Generated Legal Filings in OnlyFans Case
LOS ANGELES — A legal team representing plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit against Fenix International Limited, the parent company of OnlyFans.com, has requested permission from a California federal district judge to revise legal documents after admitting they contained false information produced by generative artificial intelligence.
AI “Hallucinations” in Court Filings
The law firm Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP filed a proposed class action accusing OnlyFans and various “chatter agencies” of civil fraud and racketeering. The lawsuit claims that users were misled into believing they were chatting directly with adult creators when, in fact, third-party chat operators often referred to as chatters were handling private messages.
However, as the case progressed, attorneys representing OnlyFans discovered that the plaintiffs’ filings included inaccurate legal citations and AI-generated errors, often referred to as “hallucinations.”
The Lawsuit’s Central Argument
The plaintiffs, led by Hagens Berman attorney Robert B. Carey, argue that OnlyFans users were unknowingly interacting with hired “chatter” agencies in intimate online settings. Carey contends that these practices exposed users to civil fraud and potential racketeering violations, since the deception allegedly involved financial transactions in private digital environments.
Attorneys Admit Use of Generative AI
During the proceedings, it emerged that one attorney on the legal team under significant personal stress and workload pressure used generative AI software to help draft court filings. This decision resulted in incorrect or fabricated legal references making their way into official documents.
Recognizing the errors, Carey and his colleagues filed amotion asking the court for permission to correct the affected briefings.
Attorneys for OnlyFans have opposed the motion, arguing that the filings were already submitted and should not be amended after the fact.
Broader Implications for the Legal Profession
This case highlights a growing challenge in the legal industry: the use of generative AI in high-stakes legal proceedings. While AI tools can speed up legal research and drafting, this incident underscores the risks of unverified AI-generated content in official court filings.
Legal experts say this situation may set a precedent for how courts handle AI-related mistakes, particularly in sensitive cases involving digital platforms and adult content industries.
Key Highlights
- Case: Class action against Fenix International Limited, parent company of OnlyFans.com.
- Issue: Attorneys used generative AI, leading to false legal citations in court documents.
- Current Motion: Plaintiffs’ legal team seeks permission to correct the filings.
- Opposition: OnlyFans’ legal representatives oppose allowing changes.
- Industry Impact: Raises serious questions about AI reliability in legal practice.
⚠️ AI in the courtroom—opportunity or risk?
Follow the ongoing case to see how AI-driven legal errors shape the future of law and digital platform litigation.
👉 Stay updated at AVN.com for the latest developments in this landmark case.
