Ticket sellers, resellers, and consumers in California should be aware of two bills making their way through the legislature that could vastly change how secondary ticket markets work in California. One aims to end speculative selling and the use of bots in buying tickets, and the other seeks to cap the markups ticket resellers can impose. Both would impose new requirements on ticket resellers and the platforms they use and expose them to greater risk of liability.
Assembly Bill 1349 would eliminate the ability of online ticket resellers to sell tickets that they do not own at the time of listing. These "speculative ticketing" resellers list tickets online, and if someone purchases the listed tickets, only then will the sellers buy the tickets and transfer them to the purchaser. AB 1349 would change this dynamic by requiring ticket resellers to have actual or "constructive possession" of any tickets they list for sale online, meaning that the reseller (a) "has fully paid for the ticket," (b) "holds a legally enforceable right to receive delivery of the ticket," and (c) "has received confirmation of purchase or assignment from the original ticket seller, event presenter, or venue operator." And any resale listing must include the section, row, and seat number of each ticket, as well as the face price printed on the ticket.
AB 1349 would permit both government enforcement actions and civil suits. Certain state and local agencies could bring claims for violations, with penalties of not more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) for certain violations, and each ticket purchased or offered for sale in violation of the law would constitute a separate violation. And these civil penalties would apply to both ticket resellers and ticket resale marketplaces. In addition, individual consumers could bring civil suits against not only the ticket reseller but also the original seller and the ticket resale marketplace for violations of the statute for two times the contracted price of the ticket, as well as expenses for attempting to attend the event and reasonable attorneys' fees and court costs.
Other provisions of AB 1349 include:
- Requiring original sellers, ticket resellers, and ticket resale marketplaces to be registered and be duly licensed (to the extent any local jurisdiction requires such registration) and imposing a criminal penalty of not more than six months in jail or $2,500 for violating this provision
- Imposing record-keeping requirements, namely that original sellers, ticket resellers, and ticket resale marketplaces must maintain records of ticket sales, deposits, and refunds for a minimum of 12 months after the initial sale
- Prohibiting ticket resellers from using trademarked or copyrighted URL, title, designation, image, mark, or other symbol without the written consent of the trademark or copyright holder, and from using any combination of text, images, web designs, or internet addresses that is substantially similar to the internet website of an event presenter, venue operator, or original seller; and defining the violation of either prohibition as false advertising under California's False Advertising Law (FAL)
- Prohibiting the use of bots and other software or services that allow the purchase of tickets in excess of posted limits or the circumventing of electronic queues, presale codes, or waiting periods
- Requiring whoever sold or facilitated the ticket to the consumer, whether it be the original seller, ticket reseller, event presenter, or ticket resale marketplace, to fully refund the cost to the consumer within 30 days of the cancellation of an event
AB 1349's restriction on the use of bots is similar to the restriction in the federal Better Online Ticket Sales Act of 2016 (BOTS Act), but AB 1349 provides more specificity than the BOTS Act (which only prohibits "the circumvention of a security measure, access control system, or other technological measure").
While AB 1349 targets the manner in which tickets are sold on secondary marketplaces, AB 1720 targets the end result: the price consumers are paying. AB 1720 prohibits resellers from selling a ticket for more than 10% more than the original price of the ticket (including any fees charged by the original seller). The 10% cap above the original purchase price applies regardless of how many times the ticket is resold, and the ticket resale listing price must include all mandatory fees or charges, except for taxes and fees imposed by a government or the postage charges actually necessary to ship a physical ticket to the consumer. In addition to the obligations it imposes on ticket resellers, AB 1720 would also obligate ticket resale marketplaces to require resellers to disclose in any advertisement or listing the original price of the ticket they seek to resell.
Unlike AB 1349, AB 1720 does not provide for a private right of action, instead limiting enforcement to only the attorney general, city attorney, or county counsel. An initial violation by an original seller, ticket reseller, or resale marketplace can result in civil liability of $1,000 per ticket sold for each initial violation and up to $2,500 per ticket sold for subsequent violations, along with restitution and disgorgement of profits obtained from violations. And a "knowing and willful pattern or practice" of violating the law can result in a penalty of $5,000 per ticket sold.
Another distinction between the two bills is that while AB 1349 applies to musical, sporting, and other live entertainment events (but not amusement parks, unless a separate ticketed event is being held there), AB 1720 applies to ticketed events generally, with a carveout for sporting events.
If passed, AB 1349 and AB 1720 would fit within a recent, growing trend of states seeking to limit speculative ticket sales (e.g., Maryland Senate Bill 539, passed in 2024, and Oregon House Bill 4024, passed in 2026) and ticket prices on the secondary market (e.g., Maine SP 403, passed in 2025). The Venable team can support ticket resellers and others in the industry in analyzing these new statutes, coming up with compliance strategies for responding to demands from private parties and inquiries from government agencies.