Assembly committee advances bill banning speculative ticket listings, sends AB 1349 to privacy and consumer protection

Assemblymember Bryan’s proposal to curb “speculative ticketing” advanced out of the Assembly Arts, Entertainment, Sports and Tourism Committee on April 8, sending AB 1349 as amended to the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee.

Supporters said the bill would prohibit sellers and resale platforms from listing tickets they do not own or do not have a contractual right to sell, require greater disclosure of seat locations, and mandate recordkeeping by secondary platforms. “This harmful practice is known as speculative ticketing,” the author said, arguing that many secondary-market listings are sold before sellers actually possess tickets and that consumers pay steep markups or are left without tickets.

The bill drew broad support from venues, artists and venue associations. Ron Gubitz, executive director of the Music Artist Coalition, said, “We simply believe that the people making the music should be the main drivers in determining how their tickets are sold.” Joe Bridal, owner and managing partner of the Music Box in San Diego, described frequent customer-service problems at venue box offices when buyers purchase overpriced or fraudulent secondary-market tickets. “They tell me that they have paid in the secondary market $400 for those tickets,” Bridal said, describing customers who come to the venue expecting front-row seats and finding the venue must resolve the problem.

Supporters included independent venues and associations such as the National Independent Venue Association, NEBA California (represented by Jim Cornett), and several professional teams and promoters who said they would continue to work with the author on operational details.

Opponents warned the committee that elements of the bill as written could have unintended consequences for legitimate resale services and competition. Robert Harrell, executive director of the Consumer Federation of California, said the measure “goes far beyond what the author and sponsors and supporters say it does,” and raised concerns the language could sweep in legitimate concierge or resale services. James Jack, representing the Coalition for Ticket Fairness, argued that the bill’s definition of speculative sales could effectively bar many lawful resale transactions that rely on delayed ticket transfers and thus “gut the resale industry.”

Committee members voiced support for consumer protections while some said technical changes may be necessary to avoid harming legitimate resale activity. Assemblymember McKenna described the current secondary-market prices as “ridiculously high” and said she would coauthor; Assemblymember Ortega moved the bill. The committee vote passed with six yes votes; the chair said the bill had six votes and would be transmitted, holding the roll open for absent members.

The committee action sends AB 1349 to the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee for further consideration and potential amendment. Supporters and opponents said they expect continued negotiations on technical language if the bill advances.

Votes at a glance: AB 1349 — passed as amended to the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee; committee chair recorded the bill as carrying six affirmative votes and the roll held open for absent members.