Onlyfans Under Fire: Class Action Lawsuit Claims 'Bait And Switch' Tactics

A Class Action That Could Change the Game

OnlyFans is in the legal spotlight once again, facing a class-action lawsuit in California. The popular subscription-based platform is accused of enticing users with the promise of "full access" to creators' content, only to hide most of it behind additional paywalls. This new legal challenge, brought forth by Los Angeles resident David Gardner, has the potential to shake up the way OnlyFans operates, as it seeks restitution under state and federal consumer protection laws.

The Allegations at a Glance

Gardner's complaint paints a picture of classic bait-and-switch tactics. He claims that users are lured into subscribing by on-screen assurances of comprehensive access and direct messaging, only to find a world of teasers, upsells, and mass direct messages nudging them towards even more paid content. "The sole benefit of some subscriptions is the barrage of sales pitches for add-ons that should have been included," Gardner states.

“They sell an all-you-can-eat promise that turns out to be à la carte,” Gardner remarked, highlighting the disconnect between marketing and reality.

Monetizing on the Edge

OnlyFans employs a monetization model that's not uncommon in the adult content industry, blending monthly subscriptions with pay-per-view messaging and à la carte bundles. However, the lawsuit argues that the platform's "full access" messaging misleads users into believing their subscription covers the main catalog of content, rather than just opening the door to further charges.

The platform's immense scale magnifies these stakes, with over 3 million creators and 200 million registered users generating over $1 billion in annual revenue. Even small discrepancies between marketing promises and actual access could have significant legal and reputational consequences for the company.

Legal Implications and Consumer Expectations

As U.S. regulators increase scrutiny on online sales tactics, often termed "dark patterns," this lawsuit could serve as a pivotal case. An FTC report, "Bringing Dark Patterns to Light," outlines how practices like misleading access claims and drip pricing can mislead consumers. California's robust consumer protection laws further empower plaintiffs to challenge misleading representations.

What's Next for OnlyFans?

Before the case can proceed on behalf of a wider class, it must clear class certification. If it advances, potential outcomes could include refunds, civil penalties, and changes to OnlyFans' interface and marketing language to ensure clearer disclosures. Previous litigation shows how fact-specific these disputes can be, especially in platforms where creators, not the platform, control content and pricing.

For subscribers, the lesson is clear: scrutinize marketing claims and understand that a subscription fee may not provide full access. Meanwhile, platforms like OnlyFans might need to revisit their disclosure practices to align with evolving regulatory standards.