Onlyfans Hit With Class Action Lawsuit Over Subscription Tactics

OnlyFans Faces New Legal Challenge

OnlyFans, the popular subscription platform, is facing a fresh class-action lawsuit filed in California. The legal action accuses the company of enticing users with "full access" promises, only to obscure much of the content behind additional paywalls. This bait-and-switch tactic, as the complaint describes, falls under the scrutiny of state and federal consumer protection laws.

David Gardner, a Los Angeles resident, is leading the charge on behalf of a proposed class of over 100 customers. The lawsuit claims that many subscribers are lured by promises of extensive access and direct communication with creators, but end up facing previews, upsells, and mass-promoted pay-per-view content instead.

The Allegations Against OnlyFans

The lawsuit argues that OnlyFans markets its subscriptions as a way to access a creator's full content and engage in one-on-one communication. However, according to the plaintiffs, once subscribers join, they find themselves met with additional fees for the majority of content, with initial posts serving merely as teasers. The suit accuses OnlyFans of making an "all-you-can-eat" promise that translates to an à la carte experience.

“The sole benefit of some subscriptions seems to be the barrage of sales pitches for add-ons that should have been included,” Gardner remarked.

The complaint aims for damages, restitution, and injunctive relief, demanding clearer disclosures about what subscribers truly receive.

Understanding OnlyFans' Monetization Model

OnlyFans operates on a blended revenue model involving monthly subscriptions, pay-per-view messages, tips, and bundled offers. Such a setup is common in the adult content industry, where creators decide their pricing and diversify income streams. However, the lawsuit targets the "full access" marketing message, arguing it misleads subscribers into expecting a comprehensive package rather than a series of upsells.

With a massive user base of over 200 million registered accounts and more than 3 million creators, the stakes are high for OnlyFans. Even small discrepancies between marketing claims and actual offerings could impact a significant portion of subscribers, posing legal and reputational risks for the platform.

Regulatory Scrutiny and Future Implications

U.S. regulators are increasingly vigilant about online sales tactics that obscure costs or essential information, often termed "dark patterns." The Federal Trade Commission's report, "Bringing Dark Patterns to Light," highlights concerns like misleading access claims and pricing structures designed to maximize spending. While the court must determine if OnlyFans' actions fit this category, the plaintiffs have a clear roadmap to argue their case effectively.

As the case moves forward, the court will assess whether the "full access" claims were misleading to reasonable consumers. Potential outcomes may include subscriber refunds, civil penalties, and revisions to OnlyFans' marketing and interface practices.

For subscribers, the lesson is to critically evaluate subscription promises, recognizing that a monthly fee may not unlock all features. For platforms like OnlyFans, the case underscores the need for transparent communications and adherence to regulatory guidelines. The pivotal question remains – did the marketing align with what subscribers received?