OnlyFans Faces Billion-Dollar Lawsuit Over Alleged “Chatter” Deception

In late July 2024, OnlyFans, the popular subscription-based platform, was hit with a class action lawsuit accusing it of deceptive practices involving so-called “chatters.” The lawsuit, filed in California federal court by the law firm Hagens Berman, claims that the platform allows workers, often based overseas, to pose as models, engaging in intimate chats with users without their knowledge. The suit, which names OnlyFans and eight agencies representing content creators, alleges that the platform misleads users into believing they are communicating directly with the models when, in reality, they are often interacting with paid workers.

The lawsuit has sparked intense debate about the ethics of OnlyFans’ practices, with billions of dollars in potential damages at stake. If successful, the case could fundamentally alter the platform’s business model, which relies heavily on its ability to connect fans directly with creators, particularly within the adult entertainment industry.

The lawsuit is based on the experiences of several plaintiffs who claim they were deceived by chatters pretending to be the models they followed. One fan, who attended a Babes in Toyland charity event in West Hollywood in August 2021, recounted his experience with adult performer Kayley Gunner. After meeting Gunner in person, he reached out to her on OnlyFans to commission a custom video. To his surprise, Gunner denied ever meeting him and knowing anything about the interaction. The fan suspected he was communicating with a hired chatter, not Gunner herself.

“I’m not an idiot,” the fan said. “I never thought I was in a relationship with these girls. OnlyFans was the same thing. It’s not real.”

This sentiment is echoed by many of the plaintiffs in the case, who argue that while they understood the transactional nature of their interactions with models, they did not expect to be communicating with ghostwriters. The lawsuit accuses OnlyFans of facilitating these deceptions by permitting agencies to hire chatters—often from countries like the Philippines—who pose as models to maintain communication with fans, upselling custom videos and photos.

OnlyFans, launched in 2016, has become a giant in the adult content industry, with over 305 million registered users spending $6.6 billion on the platform last year. For many creators, managing the volume of messages from fans is overwhelming, leading them to hire agencies to handle their accounts. These agencies often employ chatters to maintain continuous engagement with fans, using pre-recorded videos, stock phrases, and detailed customer databases to simulate personal interactions.

One issue highlighted in the lawsuit is the extent to which users unknowingly engage with chatters. Many of these workers are paid a modest wage, and agencies take a significant percentage of creators’ earnings. This system has become integral to keeping up with the demand for personal interactions, raising questions about the authenticity of the experience.

The lawsuit’s complaint begins by referencing the long history of romance scams and argues that OnlyFans’ use of chatters falls into this category of deception.

The implications of the lawsuit could be significant for OnlyFans. According to Michella Kras, one of the plaintiff attorneys, the case could force the company to disclose the use of chatters to users. “OnlyFans has a very easy fix: disclose to its users that they may be talking to chatters,” she said. While Kras doesn’t believe the lawsuit will threaten the company’s existence, she noted that it could impact revenue if users are disillusioned by the revelation.

OnlyFans has declined to comment on the pending litigation, citing company policy. However, the company has retained Skadden, a prestigious law firm, to represent it. The platform has maintained that it fosters a “real community based on a two-way dialogue,” but the lawsuit claims that this dialogue is often manufactured by chatters, rather than the creators themselves.

Mike Stabile, director of public policy for the Free Speech Coalition, criticized the lawsuit as overblown, suggesting that fans should not expect genuine relationships from adult performers. “You’re paying to role-play that you’re talking to this person,” he said, likening it to the entertainment provided by professional wrestlers or actors. Stabile also questioned the motivations behind the lawsuit, pointing out that some plaintiffs continued using OnlyFans even after learning about the chatter system.

The lawsuit comes at a time when online interactions have increasingly replaced face-to-face communication. As models rely on agencies and automation to manage their vast followings, the lines between genuine human connection and entertainment blur. Chatters, and even artificial intelligence, are stepping in to fulfill the demand for personal interaction.

For many, the deception lies not in the fantasy itself but in the undisclosed nature of these interactions. While platforms like OnlyFans offer users the opportunity to feel acknowledged and noticed, the reality may be that they are engaging with workers halfway across the world rather than the creators themselves.

As the lawsuit moves forward, it may force OnlyFans and similar platforms to rethink their business practices. Whether this results in more transparency or a fundamental change in how fans and creators interact, the case serves as a stark reminder of the complexities of digital intimacy in the modern age.

Listen to this story: