Techdirt. Stories filed under "tickets" Easily digestible tech news... http://www.techdirt.com/ en-us Techdirt. Stories filed under "tickets"http://www.techdirt.com/images/td-88x31.gifhttp://www.techdirt.com/ Fri, 3 Aug 2012 08:23:17 PDT Olympics Shuts Down Non-Commercial Online Service That Helped People Get Tickets Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120802/16543519919/olympics-shuts-down-non-commercial-online-service-that-helped-people-get-tickets.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120802/16543519919/olympics-shuts-down-non-commercial-online-service-that-helped-people-get-tickets.shtml 2012TicketAlert that would help alert people when new tickets were available. It was just a typical internet case study: some people saw a system that wasn't very good, and they built a better interface. Welcome to the internet.

Ah, but this is the Olympics, and the Olympics just doesn't do things like that. So, they shut the site down:
It seems someone at LOCOG has taken exception to our idea (or the publicity it is getting) and instead of reaching out to us or addressing the lack of a notification system, they have simply blocked our access to their server. This means we are unable to check or post any new ticket alerts.
Welcome to the Olympics, where if you don't pay the Olympics, you better not do anything to help make the Olympics a better experience.

And it's important to note that they weren't making money off of this. They were just helping to alert people to ticket availability and then driving them to the official Olympics site. They just hacked together a notification system.

Sometimes I wonder if the Olympics just wants to piss off everyone.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> olympic-failures http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120802/16543519919 Tue, 20 Sep 2011 09:35:07 PDT Police Ticket Guy Who Helped Direct Traffic After Traffic Light Failure; Then Leave Without Handling Traffic Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110917/02111815995/police-ticket-guy-who-helped-direct-traffic-after-traffic-light-failure-then-leave-without-handling-traffic.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110917/02111815995/police-ticket-guy-who-helped-direct-traffic-after-traffic-light-failure-then-leave-without-handling-traffic.shtml Radley Balko, we learn that police in Pasadena California showed up at the intersection of Fair Oaks and Huntington Avenues to issue a ticket to Alan Ehrlich. Ehrlich's crime? Directing traffic.

Apparently the traffic light went out, leading to backups of more than a mile. It was taking cars more than 30 minutes to get through. Ehrlich decided to help out -- grabbing an orange shirt and some safety flags that he had, and helped direct traffic, apparently clearing up much of the backup in about 10 minutes. It was about that time that the police showed up and issued him a citation. And... at no point did the police decide that maybe they should be directing traffic.

Amazingly, the police chief is defending all of this by saying that the force does "not have the man power" to staff someone there to direct traffic -- but they apparently have the staff to issue a citation to the guy who volunteered to help out.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> no-good-deed http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110917/02111815995 Fri, 18 Feb 2011 08:55:07 PST Dead Baltimore Cop Signed and 'Certified' Red Light Camera Tickets Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110215/10424713107/dead-baltimore-cop-signed-certified-red-light-camera-tickets.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110215/10424713107/dead-baltimore-cop-signed-certified-red-light-camera-tickets.shtml thousands of redlight camera tickets that were signed and certified by a police officer who died last fall. The law requires that each of the tickets be reviewed and certified by a human before being sent out. The fact that they were done so by someone who was deceased for many months would seem to suggest that no one was actually reviewing these tickets. The police department insists that it was just a "computer glitch," and that the tickets were reviewed and certified, but they seem to be saying "trust us." I would imagine that anyone who got one of these tickets is likely to be able to get out of it in court by pointing to the deceased officer's "certification."

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> zombie-tickets http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110215/10424713107 Tue, 9 Nov 2010 07:36:00 PST Police End Up Paying $4k To Guy They Gave Bogus Traffic Tickets To After He Flipped Them Off Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101104/17092611730/police-end-up-paying-4k-to-guy-they-gave-bogus-traffic-tickets-to-after-he-flipped-them-off.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101104/17092611730/police-end-up-paying-4k-to-guy-they-gave-bogus-traffic-tickets-to-after-he-flipped-them-off.shtml has now agreed to pay him $4,000 to settle the lawsuit, claiming that it was just cheaper to settle than to fight. Perhaps they also realized that they were likely going to lose as well.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> still-not-recommended http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20101104/17092611730 Tue, 12 Oct 2010 16:26:52 PDT Ohio Town Refunds 980 Speed Camera Tickets For Only Driving 10mph Over The Limit (Versus 11mph) Dennis Yang http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100922/10035711122/ohio-town-refunds-980-speed-camera-tickets-for-only-driving-10mph-over-the-limit-versus-11mph.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100922/10035711122/ohio-town-refunds-980-speed-camera-tickets-for-only-driving-10mph-over-the-limit-versus-11mph.shtml Dan describes how an Ohio town recently issued 980 speeding ticket refunds. The city of Garfield Heights, Ohio, installed two speed cameras, attached to unmanned police cars, and then sent speeding tickets to those that were deemed to be speeding. The policy was to only issue tickets to those driving more than 11 miles per hour over the speed limit, so, when it was found that a number of tickets were issued to those driving 10 miles per hour over the limit, almost $100,000 in ticket revenue was refunded. Apparently, city officials had told the public that the tickets would be issued if people were caught driving 11 miles over the limit. So, if that's the case, then is the speed limit actually the speed limit or not? Once again, this goes to show how completely arbitrary speed limit enforcement can be. Is there really a difference in safety in going 10 mph over the speed limit vs. 11? And, if anything, it seems that widely circulating this policy would simply encourage people to drive 9 miles over the limit.

Clearly, it's a great money maker for the city. Since the month of June, when the cameras were installed, they sent out nearly 11,000 tickets, representing about $1,000,000 in added revenue. Sure, it's possible that the city may need to cover a shortfall in a budget, but is the false guise of public safety the appropriate manner in which to obtain this revenue? At least this method is a little more scientific than other Ohio towns, where a policeman can issue a ticket by simply guessing how fast you were going.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> go-speed-racer http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100922/10035711122 Mon, 23 Aug 2010 10:39:00 PDT Bob Dylan Gets Around Service Fees & Scalpers With A Simple Plan: Pay Cash At The Door Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100820/13432610711.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100820/13432610711.shtml get away from ridiculous service fees on tickets, commenter berick pointed out that Bob Dylan has come up with an interesting strategy to not just get around service fees, but scalpers as well: no pre-bought tickets to the show, just pay cash at the door:
When Bob Dylan says his just-announced, surprise show at the Warfield in San Francisco next Wednesday, August 25 costs $60, he means it costs $60 -- no service charges. No scalpers. No secondary market. In fact, perhaps as an effort to combat all complaints about the ticketing industry at large, there simply won't be any advance tickets to the show. Fans will pay $60 -- cash only -- on their way inside the venue, and that's that.
Of course, the downside to this is that if too many people show up (a decent possibility) you might not get in at all... Still, it's interesting to see how musicians are trying to get around activities that are seen as anti-consumer when it comes to pricing live shows.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> that's-one-way... http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100820/13432610711 Fri, 20 Aug 2010 02:35:07 PDT Artists Realizing It's Time To Offer Cheaper Concert Tickets Directly, And To Get Rid Of Annoying Fees Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100819/02364310680.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100819/02364310680.shtml frustrated about fees and services charges added to ticket prices. We also wrote about how the band The Pixies went direct to fans with concert ticket sales, avoiding some of the annoying middlemen. It looks like more artists are starting to wake up and take notice.

Singer Joe Pug, who you may recall took part in our CwF+RtB experiment last year, and has been experimenting with more fan friendly business models for a while, is trying to do the same with a new $10 Tour. The idea is that all of the shows (with a couple of specific exceptions) on his next tour will cost only $10 -- and he's testing out selling at least some of the tickets directly with no fees at all, and if that goes well, will try to do so for other shows.

There is some precedent here. Corey Smith, who we've written about many times in the past, has used $5 tickets to many of his shows to help him build up his fanbase. In that case, the story went that this helped him connect with many more fans because at $5, it was easy for an existing fan to convince friends to go (or even pay for them to go), leading to many more people getting to see Corey live.

Still, what's most interesting to me is that more and more artists, like Joe, are recognizing how much people hate some aspects of the concert-going experience (mainly dealing with the middlemen who lump on all those fees) and realize that there's a really good way to better connect with fans: which is to cut out that middleman:
A few months back I bought tickets for a concert- which shall remain nameless- only to get manhandled by service charges and by their Newspeak cousins, "convenience fees". The actual price was nearly double the face of the ticket. Half of my money was going to the band I loved, the other half to horse-thieves. Reining in ticket fees has been notoriously difficult, even for artists of great influence. But in a small step, we negotiated to do SOME of the tickets directly through our website. We're going to try this for the Chicago show on 10/16. The first 50 tickets will be available exclusively at my website with zero fees. The amount charged to your credit card will be exactly 10 bucks per ticket. If all goes well we hope to roll out the no-fee ticketing for entire tours.


Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> smart http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100819/02364310680 Wed, 12 May 2010 20:34:37 PDT Restaurants Experiment With Selling Tickets For Dinner Dennis Yang http://www.techdirt.com/blog/entrepreneurs/articles/20100507/1818079346.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/blog/entrepreneurs/articles/20100507/1818079346.shtml false). That said, a restaurant is a business like any other, so experimentation with new business models is important, especially in tough economic times like we have been facing in recent years. Traditionally, restaurant reservations can be canceled at the whim of the diner without penalty, but for an industry, whose margins are continually squeezed, canceled reservations could make the difference between a profitable night and an unprofitable one. Restaurants sell a limited amount of daily perishable goods and services, which draws many parallels to both the theater and airline businesses. So, perhaps restaurateurs took note of these similarities for themselves when they started selling "tickets" for their nightly dinners instead of taking reservations. In addition to tickets to individual dinners, the restaurants also offer subscriptions to a whole season of dinners -- another tactic lifted right out of the playbook of theaters. These restaurateurs correctly recognize that dining out is not just about the food; it is a social experience just like a concert, the movies, or a sporting event.

The benefit for the restaurant is that even if the diner doesn't show up for the meal, the restaurant isn't stuck holding the bag -- the responsibility to offload an unwanted dinner ticket then shifts to the diner rather than the business. Furthermore with a guarantee of revenue for the evening, shopping for expensive perishables in preparation for an evening's dinner service is much easier. That said, pre-paying for a night's meal is a complete departure from the regular dining out experience, so at first, I can really only see this tactic working for a set of exclusive restaurants. After all, online reservation marketplace TableXchange folded last year, citing empty tables at even the most popular dining hotspots.



Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> entrepreneurial-restaurateurs http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100507/1818079346 Tue, 29 Dec 2009 04:05:00 PST Does It Make Sense That A Non-Official Advertiser Can't Give Away Sporting Events Tickets? Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091224/0133417500.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091224/0133417500.shtml stop radio stations from doing promotional giveaways of tickets they had legally purchased. The team basically claims that the terms (which no one reads nor technically "agrees" to) on the back of the ticket forbid such uses of the tickets. Instead, clearly, the Eagles wanted to sell the rights to do promotional giveaways. Now there's a similar lawsuit involving Major League Soccer and FIFA. JJ points us to a lawsuit in which the organization that handles marketing for both soccer organizations is quite upset at Black & Decker for doing ticket giveaway promotions. The reason why they're so upset? B&D competitor Makita is "the official power tool" of both soccer leagues in the US. In this case, they're arguing trademark infringement and breach of contract, though both seem questionable. If it's an accurate promotion, such that B&D is literally giving away legally purchased tickets and merchandise, then as long as it doesn't suggest endorsement from the soccer leagues, there shouldn't be much confusion. As for the breach of contract, if B&D never agreed to the contract, it's hard to see how they can be held to it.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> hard-to-see-why http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20091224/0133417500 Tue, 6 Oct 2009 03:52:35 PDT Can A Radio Station Give Away Tickets To A Football Game? The Eagles Say No... Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091005/0131106417.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091005/0131106417.shtml stop the transfer of tickets, but it appears that the Philadelphia Eagles football team also is trying to stop radio stations from doing promotional giveaways. The team has sued the owner of the radio station, saying that the terms on the back of the ticket forbid the use of the tickets for commercial purposes -- such as contests -- and also that the station is violating the Eagles' trademarks in naming them around the ticket giveaway promotion. This raises a bunch of questions about the right of first sale on a ticket. While the stadium may have the right to forbid entry to anyone, it seems like that would be a dumb move on the team's part. My guess is that the team's main concern is that it only wants partner (i.e., those who paid a ton for broadcast rights) radio stations to give away tickets -- but that doesn't mean there's a legal right there. If the tickets were legitimately bought, why shouldn't the station be able to sell them or give them away? And, considering that the radio station was accurately describing the team when using the name, that shouldn't be a trademark violation.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> right-of-first-sale http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20091005/0131106417 Fri, 18 Sep 2009 08:15:00 PDT Ticketmaster Trying To Cut Down On Scalpers... Or Increase Fee Collection For Itself? Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090917/1747286227.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090917/1747286227.shtml pushing paperless tickets as a way to cut down on scalping, and now that story seems to be getting much wider coverage. The idea is that if you buy a ticket, you have to be the one to show up, with an ID and the credit card you used, in order to attend. Ticketmaster will allow you to transfer... but it can limit the price of a transfer and charge you a fee for the transfer. That makes it seem like this is a lot more about collecting more fees from the secondary market, than really cutting down on scalping. Not to mention that it seems likely to cause problems. How do you handle buying tickets for someone else as a gift? Under this system, you'd need to buy... and then "transfer" at a fee. And what if you really can't go, but the ticket has already been transferred once (a limit they set on the system). Finally, does it really make sense to block out basic market mechanisms? I recognize that there's an issue of scalpers buying up huge blocks of tickets, but there are better mechanisms to deal with that, that don't involve limiting what legitimate purchasers can do with their tickets.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> some-good,-some-bad http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090917/1747286227 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 07:33:00 PDT StubHub Says Ticket Resales Are Booming, Thanks To Lower Prices Carlo Longino http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090611/1023495199.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090611/1023495199.shtml were up significantly in the first quarter, as secondary ticket prices fell and lured in more buyers. The head of the company says he wishes he could have some control over the prices and keep them down so the volume (which drives StubHub's revenues) stays high, but the company really has no way to control that, since each individual seller that uses its platform will try to push the price as high as they can. In any case, Stubhub's booming business helps explain why Ticketmaster is trying to grow its own resale business, grabbing a cut from the original sale, and then the resale too. On a related note, the StubHub CEO says he's not concerned about Ticketmaster's increasing use of paperless tickets as a means to thwart scalpers: "There are ways that brokers can provide these tickets. They're not elegant. They don't provide a great experience to the fan... Where there's a will there’s a way, and there are both interested sellers and interested buyers." Inevitably, resellers will find a way around the system -- but somehow, as long as Ticketmaster finds a new revenue stream coming from it, it's hard to imagine the company will mind too much.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> hot-tickets http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090611/1023495199 Wed, 10 Jun 2009 14:19:00 PDT Ticketmaster Takes Another Stab At Shutting Down Scalpers With Paperless Tickets Carlo Longino http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090609/1135485175.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090609/1135485175.shtml itself, Ticketmaster has been trying to push scalpers aside. It claims it does this for altruistic reasons, but those claims generally fall on deaf ears, with many people believing it's simply trying to capture the scalpers' revenues. It's escalating the battle now by expanding its use of paperless tickets for concerts, and will use them for the upcoming Miley Cyrus tour, after an earlier series of shows sparked a flurry of complaints about scalpers. Ticketmaster has been testing the program for a little while, and trying to sell it as a convenient solution: instead of getting a paper ticket for a show, buyers don't receive one before the show, and instead must present the credit card they used to purchase their seats to get in. On its surface, this seems like a fairly effective way of cutting out scalpers by making their transactions with their customers much more difficult. But it's still not clear why Ticketmaster sees such a need to interfere with the market -- beyond its own self-interest, of course. It's hard to imagine that Ticketmaster really cares that scalping goes on, except for the fact that it's not making any money from it.

One inevitable (and legitimate) complaint about this system is that it not only takes out scalpers, but other secondary transactions, too. Want to buy tickets as a gift, or for your kid? You'll have to take the recipient to the show and go up to the gate with them. Buy tickets for yourself, but then can't go to the show and want to give them to a friend? You're out of luck, unless you and your credit card can get there (and, of course, there are no refunds). It seems likely that Ticketmaster will have to do something to rectify this, particularly given the political scrutiny they've attracted lately, and the solution seems obvious: Ticketmaster sets up a secondary market that lets people resell their tickets and reassigns them to a new credit-card holder (taking a cut for all the hard work, of course). The company has been growing its reseller business, in particular making efforts to become the "official fan resale" partner of various sports leagues and teams, and it's hard to see it not using paperless tickets as a way to expand this business. Ticketmaster hates scalping -- unless it's the one doing the reselling. But if it wants to benefit from the free market, the market should really be free, and not one established and controlled by Ticketmaster.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> two-sets-of-rules http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090609/1135485175 Wed, 20 May 2009 19:16:30 PDT SF Giants Test Dynamic Ticket Pricing Carlo Longino http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090520/1444584955.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090520/1444584955.shtml that dynamically prices baseball tickets, adjusting prices based on demand, weather, and even other factors like who's scheduled to pitch on a particular day. Many teams already charge different prices for seats based on the opponent or other factors, but the Giants are trying to manage ticket revenue much like airlines and hotels price their products: charging a premium for in-demand seats, but lowering prices when necessary in an attempt to fill available space. For instance, in a recent series against the Mets, some bleacher seats that regularly go for $17 each varied in price from $15 to $33, depending on the weather and pitching matchups. So far, the Giants are testing the system on just 2,000 outfield seats in their 41,000-seat stadium, wary of upsetting season-ticket holders by offering similar seats to other buyers at lower prices. They say so far, they've increased sales in those seats by 17 percent over last year, but it's too early to tell if that's solely because of the pricing system. On one hand, it's easy to see some people getting upset by the system, but on the other, a case can be made that the seats offer different levels of value on different days, and should be priced accordingly. It's essentially the same system, just a little more scientific, as that used by scalpers, and they find no shortage of willing buyers. If the Giants have a lot of success with their efforts, look for similar systems to quickly catch on with other sports teams.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> one-day-sale http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090520/1444584955 Tue, 7 Apr 2009 06:20:00 PDT Schumer Tries To Force Scalpers To Register; Limit How They Buy And Sell Tickets Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090406/2144414414.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090406/2144414414.shtml in on the deal, pretending to offer "scalped" tickets that they're really selling themselves. With so much talk about this issue, you knew it was only a matter of time until some grandstanding politician got involved. In this case, it's New York's Chuck Schumer, who has introduced new legislation to try to limit ticket reselling (thanks to Eric Goldman for sending this over). It will require ticket resellers to "register" with the FTC, and then such official resellers will only be allowed to get tickets two days after the tickets go on sale.

It's difficult to see what good this does, other than create a bigger bureaucratic mess. If you don't think that the ticket resellers will figure out workarounds, you haven't been paying much attention over the past few years. Besides, the very fact that Ticketmaster thinks this is a good law is a pretty damning sign that it's not doing much to solve the problem, but is really designed to help Ticketmaster make more money.

It's still difficult to see why these issues can't be solved effectively without legislation. Bands can offer early tickets through fan clubs or mailing lists, or use other tools to make sure fans get tickets at lower prices. Besides, if the demand really is that high for certain tickets, what's wrong with letting the market determine that?

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> is-this-needed? http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090406/2144414414 Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:53:00 PDT Vancouver Olympics Using Copyright Law (Rather Than Scalping Laws) To Ban Ticket Reselling Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090319/1850154187.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090319/1850154187.shtml abuse of intellectual property law -- is now using copyright law to prevent ticket resales. Now, lots of places around the world have anti-scalping laws that forbid reselling of event tickets (or reselling them above a certain price). Vancouver, however, does not have any such law. No problem for the Olympics folks... they're using the special copyright they were granted on a whole host of common terms, including "Vancouver 2010" to sue resellers offering the tickets. Obviously, that's got nothing to do with the purpose of copyright law, but when you grant silly monopolies, don't be surprised when they're abused.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> misuse-of-copyright http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090319/1850154187 Wed, 18 Mar 2009 13:29:27 PDT Jay Leno Freaks Out That The Unemployed Might Prefer Money Over Free Leno Tickets Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090318/0134084161.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090318/0134084161.shtml selling the tickets on eBay. This was silly for a variety of reasons -- including the misdirected anger at eBay. But, more importantly, we couldn't figure out who this was harming, at all. Geldof had chosen to give out the tickets for free -- and some people preferred to have money rather than the tickets. Others would get the tickets they valued more. Everyone's better off. Where's the problem?

Apparently, Jay Leno needs that same lesson, and economist Greg Mankiw is explaining it to him. Leno went to Michigan and gave out free tickets to unemployed workers in the state -- and then complained when people put the tickets up for sale on eBay. Remember, these are unemployed people. For many of them, do you think they'd prefer some extra cash or the opportunity to see Leno live? Hell, do you think they'd be better off with cash or the free trip to Leno? Obviously, some greatly prefer the cash -- and it actually seems quite mean of Leno to try to deny them that cash by demanding that eBay take down the auctions.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> let's-explain-the-free-market... http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090318/0134084161 Mon, 16 Mar 2009 12:54:30 PDT Ticketmaster Collaborates With Artists And Promoters To Shove Scalpers Aside Carlo Longino http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090312/0729224090.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090312/0729224090.shtml anti-competitive -- complaints which have gathered pace with its recent move to merge with Live Nation. The company has done plenty of things to try to drive scalpers out of business before, in hopes of sucking up their profit margins, and its latest move will further endear itself to fans. The WSJ reports that Ticketmaster is collaborating with artists and concert promoters to sell premium-priced tickets to shows on its TicketExchange site, and making them look as if they're being sold by fans. Trent Reznor explains the situation in the eminently reasonable way we've come to expect, saying that artists know they could charge much higher prices to some of their fans, but they "don't want to come off as greedy pricks asking that much, even though the market says its value is that high." So instead, they feed them to the reseller market, or as in this case, become the reseller themselves, but obfuscate that fact.

Ticketmaster execs decry the scalper market, and claim it's not fair to artists, who don't get any of the scalper's profits; under the TicketExchange deals, it divides the revenues with artists and concert promoters. This is all pretty bizarre: if Ticketmaster wants to jack up ticket prices, it seems like it would just raise them upfront. It's also not clear why the company thinks that it's abhorrent for scalpers to charge consumers high prices, but it's perfectly okay for Ticketmaster to charge them prices over the tickets' face value. This news will hardly endear the company further to consumers, and probably won't help it with government regulators, either.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> nothing-at-face-value http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090312/0729224090 Wed, 8 Oct 2008 21:36:18 PDT Another YouTube Speeder Found Not Guilty Due To Lack Of Evidence Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081008/0934472490.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081008/0934472490.shtml scour YouTube for videos of people filming themselves speeding. However, at the same time, we're seeing at least a few of the tickets handed out for such YouTube speeding thrown out. The latest is over in the UK, where a guy charged with speeding due to a YouTube video has been found not guilty because there's not enough evidence that he was the one actually driving the car -- or that the car was really traveling at the speed shown on the speedometer. This doesn't mean that folks posting their speeding videos on YouTube won't still be fined, but it appears that (at least in the UK) courts are making sure that there's enough actual evidence there to make the fines stick.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> be-careful-when-you-speed-and-youtube http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20081008/0934472490 Fri, 25 Jul 2008 17:23:22 PDT Craigslist Forced To Cough Up Name Of Oscars Ticket Seller To The Movie Industry Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080725/1451461795.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080725/1451461795.shtml now suing a bunch of folks who tried to sell their tickets online, and even got a judge to force Craigslist to reveal the name of a seller in order to sue him.

So, here's my confusion: if the tickets are non-transferable, why not just check IDs at the door and not let those who were not given tickets?

As for forcing Craigslist to reveal the name of the seller, why is that allowed? The Academy can have whatever rules it wants in terms of letting in or not letting in people, but what law was broken by the seller, and what makes it so that Craigslist should be forced to give up the name of an anonymous seller? All the Academy had to do was not let the person in the door, but apparently it chose not to run things that way. But that's the Academy's choice, not a legal issue the requires revealing the name of an anonymous seller.

Furthermore, the Academy's explanation for this also seems ridiculous: "If you don't know who's inside the theater, it's very difficult to provide security." Really? Most places that provide security don't know the names of everyone who's there and they seem to do just fine. And, again, if knowing who's in there is such a big deal, then why not identify them as they enter, and verify that they're supposed to be there? None of that would then involve lawsuits. But, then again, this is the movie industry, which has shown a penchant for lawsuits over actually thinking things through and taking the easier path.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> but-why? http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080725/1451461795 Thu, 10 Jan 2008 04:53:42 PST UK Politicians Support Having Musicians Paid Multiple Times If Tix Are Resold Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080110/010423.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080110/010423.shtml back to the musician. It's difficult to see how this is reasonable. If anything it sounds like double dipping. In a normal transaction, after you've sold something, you no longer have a right to have any say over what the buyer does with his purchase. If he sells it for more money, that's his to keep. That certainly seems fair to everyone. What is clouding this when it comes to ticket sales is that professional ticket resellers have been monopolizing the ticket business, figuring out ways (sometimes using questionable means) to buy up all hot tickets within seconds of them going on sale. They then quickly turn around and resell them, sometimes at greatly inflated prices. This is upsetting many fans for completely understandable reasons -- and so the government is trying to figure out what to do about these "touts" (which in the US we call "scalpers").

The recommended policy starts off well by saying it's not a good idea to ban ticket sales, but then supports requiring any resale to kick back some of the profit to the musician or sports team. That actually seems like the worst of all world's situation. That's unlikely to stop ticket resales and jacked up prices, and it actually rewards the artists for getting the tickets into the hands of resellers. It gives those performers a chance to double dip on much higher ticket sale prices, while allowing them to shrug and say that they really priced them at an affordable level. There are ways to deal with the issues raised by ticket resales, none of which require government intervention -- but it's difficult to see how the proposed solution does anything at all to help, while doing plenty to eat away at the concept of having ownership of a product you actually bought.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> first-sale-is-for-suckers http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080110/010423 Thu, 18 Oct 2007 21:27:55 PDT New England Patriots Spying On Ticket Resales; Court Forces Stubhub To Hand Over Ticket Seller Names Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071018/184111.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071018/184111.shtml ban the resale of tickets to events. It seems a bit silly to tell someone who bought a ticket to a concert or a sporting event that they're not allowed to resell it, but apparently some event organizers feel differently -- especially when the tickets are sold at greater than face value. The New England Patriots apparently are so adamant that people shouldn't be reselling their tickets for profit that they've convinced a court to force ticket resale marketplace StubHub to hand over the names of everyone who resold Patriots tickets for above face value. This seems like a rather large privacy violation -- and it clearly violates Stubhub's own terms of service (which is why the company fought it in court). You could understand being forced to turn over such information in a criminal lawsuit, but this is the New England Patriots requesting and getting the private info of sellers. For a team that just got into some trouble for spying on opposing teams, spying on their fans' private transactions doesn't seem like a step forward.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> privacy?-schmivacy http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20071018/184111