The U.S. House of Representatives easily passed the bipartisan TICKET Act in a 409-15 vote on Tuesday (April 29), sending Congress’ first-ever regulatory framework for the event ticketing business on to the Senate.
Sponsored by Reps. Gus Bilirakis (R-Fla.) and Jan Schakowsky (D-lll.), the legislation is meant to improve transparency and disclosure of ticket pricing and fees, ban deceptive marketing practices and improve consumer protections by requiring refunds for cancelled or postponed events.
While the legislation introduces long-sought legal protections for artists and fans, some advocacy groups argue that the bill doesn’t go far enough to curb ticket scalping and warn that its language could inadvertently legalize controversial sales practices, including speculative ticket sales.
“The Ticket Act that just passed the House does not do nearly enough to protect fans and consumers against bad actors,” reads a statement from National Independent Trade Organization executive director Nathan Marro shortly after the bill passed.
At issue is a clause in the bill that Marro and other industry groups like the National Independent Venue Association say create a legal loophole for speculative ticket sales — a highly criticized practice where scalpers sell tickets they don’t actually own, only procuring the tickets after a consumer has agreed to buy them at a substantial markup. Under the language of the TICKET Act a “ticket exchange that does not have actual or constructive possession of an event ticket shall not sell, offer for sale, or advertise for sale such event ticket.” Marro worries that the provision is diluted by a loophole in the legislation which allows secondary sites like Vivid to offer “a service to an individual to obtain an event ticket on behalf of such individual.”
Marro argues that such a service — similar to Vivid’s Seat Saver program, where consumers pay to procure seats before they go on sale to the public, will worsen long-standing public complaints about fair access to tickets.
“Vivid Seats spec ticket ‘seat saver’ program is still 100% legal,” under the current language of the bill, Marro said. “NITO urges the Senate to strengthen this bill prior to passage and we will continue to advocate for stronger protections for our community.”
Stephen Parker, executive director for the National Independent Venues Association, also called out the spec ticket loophole, noting “the inclusion of a ‘concierge service’ carveout, as written in the TICKET Act, would undermine” the legislation. Specifically, Parker asserts that the carve out erodes the trust the public has in the artist — or show presenter — and their ability to fairly and transparently schedule ticket sales. When services like Seat Saver mislead fans into thinking they can buy tickets for high profile events ahead of schedule, Parker says trust in the safety and fairness of the ticket sales process is diminished.
“States across the country have proven that strong, loophole-free ticketing consumer protections work, and Congress should build on that momentum,” wrote Parker, noting that legislatures in Arizona, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota and Nevada all banned speculative tickets sales without carve outs for concierge programs like seat saver.
Parker and Marro have identified other shortcomings with the TICKET Act, including stronger enforcement of the BOTS Act. Marro said his group of talent agents and managers would also like to see greater disclosure around all-in pricing so fans know how much was added to the face value of the ticket by the promoter, the ticketing company and the venue.
The TICKET Act now heads to the U.S. Senate for consideration.
