What’s Next
The plaintiffs have until August 27 to file their motion to correct the record, though they’ve indicated they’re ready to move faster if the judge demands it. Meanwhile, OnlyFans is arguing that these repeated citation errors demonstrate such “abuse of the judicial system” that the plaintiffs have essentially forfeited their right to oppose moving the case to England.
What This Motion Does: OnlyFans is essentially arguing that the lawyers’ repeated use of fake citations shows they’re not competent to litigate in U.S. federal court, so the case should be dismissed or transferred to English courts where it “belongs” under the platform’s terms of service.
The case highlights a growing problem in the legal profession: lawyers increasingly rely on AI tools for research and writing, but the technology isn’t sophisticated enough to distinguish between real legal precedent and convincing-sounding fiction. When ChatGPT and similar tools “hallucinate” fake court cases, the results can be professionally devastating for attorneys who don’t verify the AI’s work.
For OnlyFans subscribers hoping to see their racketeering claims resolved, the fake citation fiasco represents yet another delay in what’s already been a year-long legal battle. Whether the case ultimately proceeds in California federal court or gets shipped off to England may now depend as much on judicial patience with AI-generated legal fiction as on the actual merits of the forum-selection dispute.
