House Technology Innovation Committee adopts substitute to HB 563 after arts groups detail ticket fraud

The House Technology Innovation Committee adopted a substitute to House Bill 563 after multiple performing-arts organizations testified that deceptive ticket resale practices and fraudulent listings are harming patrons and venues.

Chair Claggett recognized Vice Chair Workman’s motion to amend HB 563 with a substitute. Vice Chair Workman said the substitute “aligns its language with the Federal Trade Commission's updated 2025 ticketing rules, removes provisions that would be too difficult to enforce, and clarifies key terms to avoid unintended impacts on responsible participants in the resale market.” The substitute was adopted "without objection."

Proponents told the committee the problems are widespread. Chelsea Thompson, president and CEO of the Renaissance Performing Arts Association, said deceptive third-party sites often mimic venue branding and appear above official sites in search results, drawing patrons to fraudulent listings. “Ticket scams and deceptive resale practices have become a significant and rapidly escalating problem,” Thompson said, adding that patrons have been charged “3 to 4 times the price of our ticket” and sometimes arrive with non-scannable or invalid tickets.

Thompson estimated an organizational impact of about $90,000 over three years, with two-thirds occurring in the past year, and said venues spend substantial staff time searching for and reporting fraudulent listings. “We almost always choose to make it right, issuing complimentary tickets or credits on their accounts,” she said, describing the financial strain on nonprofit presenters.

Sue Porter, executive director of BalletMet, told members that staff tracking during the Nutcracker season recorded “110 situations involving 233 tickets” and that chargebacks tied to fraudulent purchases exceeded $100,000 for that production cycle. Porter said the volume and geographic spread of incidents make individual enforcement by venues impractical and urged the committee to provide enforcement authority to the attorney general and statewide consumer protections.

Wilma Mullet of the Tuscarawas Arts Partnership described similar problems for small-town theaters, citing examples in which third-party listings advertised $20 seat tickets for as much as $400 and noting that deceptive sponsored ads sometimes appear ahead of official venue pages in search results.

Committee members asked how scams work and what recourse venues currently have. Witnesses described two broad tactics: (1) fraudsters mimicking venues via sponsored ads and fake sites that mislead buyers, and (2) resellers who purchase genuine tickets and relist them at inflated prices. Thompson said venues cancel suspect orders when detected, report listings to platforms and try to educate patrons, but that the scale of deceptive listings outpaces local efforts.

Some committee members raised concerns about unintended effects, including Representative Bailey, who asked whether restrictions on dynamic pricing or session price changes could burden small nonprofit venues that use third-party tools to manage sales. Witnesses said most small nonprofits have their own ticketing platforms and that the primary harm comes from unauthorized and deceptive third-party listings.

The substitute adopted into HB 563, according to proponents, would require clearer, all‑in pricing disclosures, prohibit sales of tickets without actual possession or constructive control, restrict deceptive use of venue names and branding, and create enforcement pathways for the attorney general. The committee concluded the third hearing and received a staff one‑page summary of testimony and issues; no recorded roll-call votes were taken on the floor during the hearing.

The committee adjourned after concluding the hearing on HB 563.