bill

California’s ticketing industry could be undergoing some major changes.

On Thursday, state Assemblymember Matt Haney (D-San Francisco) introduced a new bill, the California Fans First Act, that would impose price caps on tickets sold in the resale market, limiting prices to no more than 10% above the ticket’s face value.

By making it illegal to sell overly expensive tickets, AB 1720 is aimed at making resale tickets more affordable for fans. If the legislation becomes law, it would apply only to shows in California and exclude tickets to sporting events.

AB 1720 was introduced weeks after a similar bill, AB 1349, reached the California Senate. The latter aims to ban speculative ticket sales (tickets that resellers don’t yet possess) in the state. If enacted, the proposed legislation would require sellers to have event tickets in their possession before listing them for sale and would raise the maximum civil penalty for each violation from $2,500 to $10,000.

Both bills aim to better regulate the state’s resale ticketing market.

Over the last several years, high ticket prices have been a recurring complaint among concertgoers. Rising demand for tickets has spurred a secondary resale marketplace for all kinds of high-profile live events, including music tours and sports games, making it harder to get tickets on the primary market.

Ticketmaster and its parent company Live Nation have been at the center of this issue for years, as the major ticketing vendor sells around 80% of tickets through its website. The company is currently facing lawsuits from both the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission, alleging monopolistic practices and illegal ticket vendor practices.

“We’re trying to convince the federal government and state governments to get on the same page of recognizing where the problem is, which is overwhelmingly in the resale industry, and trying to do something about it,” said Dan Wall, Live Nation’s vice president of corporate and regulatory affairs, in a previous interview with The Times.

In a statement, Live Nation said it supports “efforts to protect concert fans and artists” and that the latest bill “targets a core problem in live music: predatory resale sites.”

Similar legislation has been popping up nationwide and around the world — the U.K. recently announced plans to ban the resale of tickets for prices higher than their face value.

A resale cap was successfully passed in Maine last year, with tickets only allowed to be sold at 110% of the ticket’s original price. Other states like New York, Vermont, Washington and Tennessee are also considering ticketing regulations.

Some critics see this surge of ticketing legislation as a way to distract from Ticketmaster/Live Nation’s legal troubles and single out the resale market.

Diana Moss, the director of competition policy at the Progressive Policy Institute, said that by capping resale ticket prices, AB 1720 “puts consumers last, not first.”

“It buys into the false narrative that the secondary market is to blame for all problems in ticketing, deflecting attention from the Live Nation-Ticketmaster monopoly,” said Moss in a statement to The Times. “Caps will decimate resale, the only market with competition, and hand Live Nation even more power to jack up ticket fees.”

An amnesty law that would provide clemency to political prisoners in Venezuela has passed an initial vote unanimously in the National Assembly, stirring hopes among the country’s opposition.

On Thursday, members of both the governing socialist party and the opposition delivered speeches in favour of the new legislation, known as the Amnesty Law for Democratic Coexistence.

“The path of this law is going to be full of obstacles, full of bitter moments,” said Jorge Rodriguez, the head of the National Assembly.

But he added that it would be necessary to “swallow hard” in order to help the country move forward.

“We ask for forgiveness, and we also have to forgive,” Rodriguez said.

But critics nevertheless pointed out that the text of the bill has yet to be made public, and it offers no clemency for individuals accused of serious crimes, including drug trafficking, murder, corruption or human rights violations.

Instead, media reports about the legislation indicate that it focuses on charges often levelled against protesters and opposition leaders.

What does the bill say?

The bill would grant amnesty to individuals accused of crimes like treason, terrorism, rebellion, resisting authorities, instigation of illegal activities, and spreading hate, if those crimes were committed in the context of political activism or protest.

Opposition leaders like Maria Corina Machado would also see bans on their candidacy for public office lifted.

In addition, the legislation specifies certain events that would qualify for amnesty, including the demonstrations that unfolded in 2007, 2014, 2017, 2019 and 2024.

That period stretches from the presidency of the late President Hugo Chavez, founder of the “chavismo” movement, through the presidency of his handpicked successor, Nicolas Maduro.

Both Chavez and Maduro were accused of the violent suppression of dissent, through arbitrary arrest, torture and extrajudicial killings.

But on January 3, the administration of United States President Donald Trump launched a military operation in Venezuela to abduct Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. They have since been transported to New York City, where they await trial on charges related to drug trafficking.

While members of Venezuela’s opposition have cheered the military operation as a long overdue move, experts have argued that the US likely violated international law as well as Venezuela’s sovereignty in removing Maduro from power.

Weighing Maduro’s legacy

Images of Chavez were a common sight during Thursday’s debate at the National Assembly, which has been dominated since 2017 by members of the chavismo movement.

That year, Venezuela’s top court dissolved the opposition-led National Assembly and briefly absorbed its powers, before re-establishing a legislature stacked with Maduro supporters.

In 2018 and again in 2024, Maduro claimed victory in contested elections that critics say were marred by fraud.

In the July 2024 vote, for instance, the government refused to release voter tallies, as was previously standard practice. The opposition, however, obtained copies of nearly 80 percent of the tallies, which contradicted the government’s claims that Maduro had won a third six-year term.

After Maduro’s abduction last month, the remnants of his government remained in power.

Within days, his vice president — Delcy Rodriguez, the sister of the National Assembly leader — was sworn in as interim president.

She used her inaugural speech to denounce the “kidnapping of two heroes who are being held hostage: President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores”.

Rodriguez has nevertheless cooperated with US demands, including by supporting a bill to open Venezuela’s nationalised oil industry to foreign investment.

On the floor of the National Assembly on Thursday, her brother Jorge raised a photo of Chavez holding a crucifix while he spoke. Maduro’s son, National Assembly member Nicolas Maduro Guerra, also presented remarks.

“Venezuela cannot endure any more acts of revenge,” Maduro Guerra said as he appealed for “reconciliation”.

Venezuela’s opposition reacts

Still, opposition members in the National Assembly expressed optimism about the bill.

National Assembly representative Tomas Guanipa, for instance, called it the start of a “new, historic chapter” in Venezuelan history, one where political dissidents would no longer be “afraid to speak their minds for fear of being imprisoned”.

Nearly 7.9 million Venezuelans have left the country in recent decades, fleeing political persecution and economic instability.

But there have been lingering concerns about the human rights situation in Venezuela in the weeks following Maduro’s abduction — and whether it is safe to return home.

President Rodriguez has pledged to release political detainees and close the infamous prison El Helicoide, where reports of torture have emerged. But some experts say the number of people released does not match the number the government has reported.

The human rights group Foro Penal, for instance, has documented 383 releases since January 8.

That figure, however, is lower than the 900 political prisoners the government has claimed to have released. Foro Penal estimates 680 political prisoners remain in detention.

Opposition figures also allege that the government continues to intimidate and harass those who voice sympathy for Maduro’s removal and other opinions that run contrary to the chavismo movement.

Still, the head of Foro Penal, Alfredo Romero, applauded the initial passage of the amnesty law as a step forward.

“Amnesty is the framework that will ensure… that the past does not serve to halt or derail transition processes,” Romero told the news agency AFP.

A second vote is expected to be held on Tuesday next week.

SACRAMENTO — National union leaders, including the head of one of California’s largest labor organizations, on Wednesday urged Gov. Gavin Newsom to protect workers as artificial intelligence threatens to replace or surveil employees — and warned that a failure to do so could hurt his presidential ambitions.

“This is a priority for the entire nation,” Lorena Gonzalez, president of the California Federation of Labor Unions, said at a news conference near the state Capitol. “He cannot spend his time waiting to be done in California and think he’s not going to get questions about the true issues surrounding AI, Big Tech and the Big Tech billionaires that are trying to buy our government.”

Gonzalez, a former state lawmaker from San Diego, said the federation is sponsoring a package of new bills aimed at reining in the use of AI and protecting the rights of workers, including safeguards against spying in the workplace and restrictions on layoffs.

The package of bills supported by labor organizations includes:

• Senate Bill 947 by Sen. Jerry McNerney (D-Stockton), which would require human oversight if an algorithm is used to justify the discipline or termination of an employee.
• Senate Bill 951, introduced by Sen. Eloise Gomez Reyes (D-Colton), which would require employers to provide a 90-day advance notice to workers and local and state governments before AI-related layoffs. It would apply to cases affecting 25 or more workers or 25% of the workforce, whichever is less. Recent layoffs, including at Amazon, Expedia and Pinterest, have been tied to AI, although some economists argue it’s challenging to determine whether that was the primary factor.
• Assembly Bill 1331, dubbed “No bosses in the bathroom,” would grant workers the right to remove workplace surveillance tools when entering public bathrooms or certain employee-only areas. The bill, authored by Assemblymember Sade Elhawary (D-Los Angeles), would subject employers to a $500 civil penalty for violations.

Gonzalez said labor organizations are often told to “work it out” with businesses but argued this was a dead end.

“We are not going to be able to achieve guardrails by working with bosses who want no guardrails,” she said. “It is time that the governor engages with workers in the workplace. Every AI convening he does, everybody he’s pulled together is [representing] AI and Big Tech lobbyists.”

Gonzalez was joined Wednesday by Liz Shuler, president of the AFL-CIO, and other labor leaders from Iowa, Georgia, North Carolina and Nevada.

“This is the most urgent issue that we [as workers] are facing,” Shuler said. “This is a crisis and no one is prepared.”

In a joint letter addressed to Newsom, they implored the governor to act quickly to establish meaningful safeguards around the technology.

“This fight extends beyond devastating job losses and new forms of union busting,” a copy of the letter states. “There is dignity in human work that is the foundation of a healthy, productive democracy. The future of our economy and our society cannot be left to the unchecked whims of profit driven technology corporations and billionaires.”

In an email to The Times, Newsom spokesperson Tara Gallegos said the governor had a strong record of fighting for workers’ rights, including raising the minimum wage and expanding sick leave and other worker protections.

“No Governor has done more than Governor Gavin Newsom to regulate AI in a way that protects workers without killing jobs or innovation,” she wrote. “Under his leadership, California has taken the most comprehensive, worker-centered approach to AI in the country.”

Adults in the United States are growing increasingly concerned about the ramifications of AI, according to a survey from the Pew Research Center. Fifty percent of those surveyed last year said they are “more concerned than excited” about the increased use of AI in daily life, up from 37% in 2021.

The official Super Bowl halftime show on Sunday will feature Bad Bunny, the Grammy winner for album of the year, at the height of his powers and influence. Those upset by his onstage comments about the dignity of Latinos and immigrants, however, can turn to a competing bill featuring Kid Rock and Gabby Barrett.

Rock, the perennial MAGA raconteur and country-rock singer, will perform for the far-right activist group Turning Point USA’s counterprogramming event streaming across the conservative mediasphere. Turning Point USA is the activist group founded by the late Charlie Kirk, who was killed last year at a speaking event in Utah.

“We plan to play great songs for folks who love America,” Rock said in a statement announcing the bill. “We’re approaching this show like David and Goliath. Competing with the pro football machine and a global pop superstar is almost impossible … or is it?”

“He’s said he’s having a dance party, wearing a dress and singing in Spanish? Cool. We plan to play great songs for folks who love America,” Rock said, in an overt jab at the actual Super Bowl halftime show headliner.

Veteran country acts Lee Brice and Brantley Gilbert and Barrett, an “American Idol” alum with a 2019 Hot 100 hit in “I Hope,” will also perform.

While Rock’s right-wing politics have largely eclipsed his musical relevance in 2026, he’s recently tried to position himself as a power broker for MAGA-friendly concerts with just enough plausible appeal for more neutral country and rock fans. His planned 2026 touring festival, Rock the Country, is set to feature Blake Shelton, recent Grammy winner Jelly Roll, Creed and Miranda Lambert, but lost Ludacris and Morgan Wade following blowback from fans.

When Bad Bunny was booked for the Super Bowl in October, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said, “I didn’t even know who Bad Bunny was. But it sounds like a terrible decision, in my view, from what I’m hearing. It sounds like he’s not someone who appeals to a broader audience.”

“There are so many eyes on the Super Bowl — a lot of young, impressionable children. And, in my view, you would have Lee Greenwood, or role models, doing that. Not somebody like this, ” he added.

President Trump said a bill featuring the Grammy-winning Puerto Rican superstar — and the famously anti-Trump punk band Green Day — was part of the reason he would not attend the game this year. “I’m anti-them. I think it’s a terrible choice,” he said. “All it does is sow hatred. Terrible.”

The Clintons agree to testify in congressional probe of high-society sex offender Jeffrey Epstein amid contempt threat.

Former ‍United States President Bill ‍Clinton and Hillary Clinton, the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee, will testify in a congressional investigation into the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, a spokesperson for the ex-president said.

The ⁠decision by the Clintons announced on Monday could head off a planned vote in the Republican-led ​House of Representatives to hold the high-profile Democratic Party veterans in contempt for refusing to appear before lawmakers, which could lead to criminal charges.

“The former President and former ‌Secretary of State will be there. They look forward to setting a precedent that applies to everyone,” the Clintons’ deputy chief of staff, Angel Urena, said ‌in a post on social media.

Urena posted the announcement above a House Oversight Committee statement from earlier on Monday that accused the Clintons of “defying lawful subpoenas” and of “trying to dodge contempt by requesting special treatment”.

“The Clintons are not above the law,” the Oversight Committee said.

Last week, the Oversight Committee recommended the couple be held in contempt for refusing ‍to testify about ⁠their relationship with Epstein.

The Clintons had offered to cooperate with the committee’s probe into Epstein, but refused to appear in person, saying the investigation was a partisan exercise aimed at protecting President Donald Trump, who was a longtime friend of Epstein.

Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson welcomed the news from the Clintons, but ‌did not say whether the chamber ⁠would drop its planned contempt vote.

“That’s a good development,” he said. “We expect everyone to comply with Congress’s subpoenas.”

Democrats say the House probe is being weaponised to attack political opponents of Trump – who has not been called to testify despite being long associated with Epstein – rather than to conduct legitimate oversight.

Trump spent months trying to block the disclosure of investigative files linked to Epstein, but pressure from his Make America Great Again (MAGA) base and some Republican lawmakers forced the president to order the release of millions of documents in the case.

Bill Clinton flew on Epstein’s plane several ‌times in the early 2000s after leaving office. He has expressed regret about the relationship and said he knew nothing about  Epstein’s criminal activity.

Hillary Clinton said she had no meaningful interactions with Epstein, never flew on his plane and never visited his private island.

The Epstein affair continues to cast a long shadow over US politics, and now, the United Kingdom’s, entangling prominent figures including the disgraced former-prince Andrew and ex-UK ambassador to the US Peter Mandelson.

UK police said on Monday they are reviewing reports of alleged misconduct involving Mandelson, whose name surfaced more than 5,000 times in the US Justice Department files on Epstein.

The veteran British politician was fired as ambassador to the US last ‍year after emails came to light that showed him calling Epstein “my best pal” and advising him on seeking early release from prison.

Mandelson has apologised to Epstein’s victims and denied wrongdoing.

An exciting yet excruciating playoff loss to the Seahawks doesn’t diminish the Rams’ accomplishments this season. Their ability in coming back to win so many games that appeared lost showcased their resilience time after time, week after week. Thanks for the memories.

Marty Zweben
Palos Verdes Estates

When are the Rams and coach Sean McVay going to stop ignoring special teams? Open the checkbook and hire the best special teams coach available. They also need to draft a shutdown corner or two. You don’t need another receiver.

Russell Hosaka
Torrance

Editor’s note: The team hired Raymond “Bubba” Ventrone as special teams coordinator.

So Bill Plaschke wants to put the blame on the Rams’ loss in the NFC title game solely on Sean McVay? The defense’s atrocious cornerbacks don’t deserve most of the blame? And Plaschke’s blood-boiling need to make the grand statement way before anything is certain doesn’t prove the Plaschke Curse is alive and well? He not only jinxed them once but twice. They lost to Seattle and lost control of the No. 1 seed immediately after the first prediction they’d go to the Super Bowl and then lost again to Seattle after the second. Will someone please take this guy’s laptop away from him until the Rams actually make the Super Bowl!?!?!

Danny Balber Jr.
Pasadena

Bill Plaschke in his column blames the decisions made by coach McVay, which have some merit, for the Rams losing in the NFC championship game. Of course, there is no mention of the prediction made by Plaschke the week before about the Rams winning quite confidently and going on to Super Bowl LX. The Rams and McVay never had a real chance being under the Plaschke curse.

Wayne Muramatsu
Cerritos

I can only hope that if I ever decide to enter a sporting competition, Bill Plaschke predicts I will not win it.

Andrew Sacks
Riverside

My dad used to tell me to only watch the end of NBA games, because they are always tied going into the last minute. The NFL is now very much like that, as evidenced by most of this season’s playoff games. And I wouldn’t have it any other way! While I’m bummed about the Rams’ finish, here’s to 2025-26, the best NFL season in recent memory.

Robert Gary
Westlake Village

WASHINGTON — The House, with Rep. Norman Y. Mineta (D-San Jose) emotionally recalling his own experiences in a camp for Japanese-American internees during World War II, today gave final congressional approval to a bill expressing a national apology and providing a $20,000 tax-free payment to every surviving internee.

The bill, whose total price tag is $1.25 billion, passed by a vote of 257 to 156 and now goes to President Reagan, who has already promised to sign it and “close a sad chapter in American history.”

The bill provides for the tax-free payments to an estimated 62,000 former internees who are still living.

It acknowledges “the fundamental injustice of the evacuation, relocation, and internment” of the 120,000 men, women and children, mostly West Coast residents of Japanese ancestry, in the months after the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor in December, 1941, propelling the United States into the war.

‘A Monumental Injustice’

Mineta was 10 years old when he and his family were taken in 1942 from their home in San Jose to a prison camp established at the Santa Anita race track. Today he presided as Speaker pro tem as the House took final action on the compensation bill.

“This legislation touches all of us because it goes to the very core of our nation,” Mineta said in a speech closing debate. “I am deeply honored to serve in this body as it takes the great step of admitting and redressing a monumental injustice.”

But the bill was opposed by a number of members who, although they agreed the evacuation order was wrong, said cash payments were not appropriate.

Rep. Norman D. Shumway (R-Stockton) said: “There was a serious wrong done to many good American citizens. . . . But I do not see the remedy, the payment of $20,000, as the right answer.”

Nothing for Families

The Senate approved the measure by voice vote last week. The bill authorizes $1.25 billion for the payments, but the money will be provided over time with no more than $500 million to be appropriated in any one year.

The measure does not provide compensation to families of internees now dead; only those living when the bill becomes law will be eligible for the $20,000 payments.

The Japanese-Americans were rounded up and sent to the internment camps in the Rocky Mountains and the South under a 1942 executive order signed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Despite arguments that the order violated the constitutional rights of those sent to the camps without any charge or trial, the Supreme Court ruled in 1944 the action was within the President’s powers as commander in chief in wartime.

In 1980, a special commission was created to examine the issue. It recommended that compensation be paid, concluding that the evacuation order was based on war hysteria and racial prejudice. No similar action was taken against Americans of German or Italian ancestry, although the United States also was at war with those two countries.

Aleutian Islanders

The bill directs the Justice Department to identify and locate eligible individuals, who will be notified and then have 18 months to accept payment.

It also provides restitution payments of $12,000 to residents of the Aleutian Islands who were relocated by the government during the war. In addition, the bill provides $5-million compensation for the Aleuts for destruction of their villages and community property, plus $1.4 million for destroyed church property.

Another $15 million is provided to compensate the Aleuts for the loss of Attu Island, which was turned into a national wildlife refuge following the war.

A year ago, Colorado firefighters Rick Balentine and Tim Cottrell were driving trucks carrying donations from Aspen to Los Angeles for victims of the Eaton and Palisades fires.

As they headed west, they planned to stop in Las Vegas and, while there, made a spontaneous decision to see the Eagles’ residency at the Sphere. Balentine and Cottrell bought resale tickets on StubHub for around $400 each. Cottrell used his credit card and received a confirmation email. But once they arrived to the venue, they weren’t allowed in. The seller failed to send the tickets.

All Cottrell could find was an email that said his tickets had been canceled, moments before the concert was to start. Other than getting their money back, there was no further explanation.

“We knew they were aftermarket tickets,” Balentine said, “but never in a million years did I think that tickets could get canceled.”

“I was very disappointed. There needs to be more protection out there, both for consumers and for artists, so people aren’t getting ripped off all the time.”

The rising demand for tickets has spurred a growing marketplace for all kinds of high-profile live events, including music tours and sports series like the upcoming World Cup. Whenever fans are unable to secure tickets on the primary market, through sellers like Ticketmaster or AXS, many will turn to the secondary market for resale tickets. Those tickets are typically sold through platforms like StubHub, SeatGeek and Vivid Seats. Customers who bought their passes directly from Ticketmaster can also resell them on that platform.

The majority of secondary-market transactions can be easy, leaving both the reseller and the customer satisfied. But with the rise of speculative or fake tickets, like the ones Balentine and Cottrell bought, securing valid tickets from the resale market has become more challenging.

What are speculative tickets?

Speculative tickets are offered by resellers who list concert passes they don’t yet have in their possession, with the intention that they will ultimately acquire the tickets and deliver them to the buyer. According to 2025 data from Live Nation, one in three Americans has fallen victim to a ticketing scam. But under California’s bill, AB 1349, selling speculative tickets could be banned on all resale platforms in the state. On Monday, the bill passed in an assembly vote and is headed to the state Senate for review.

Thousands of fans enjoy Shakira’s performance at SoFi Stadium in August.

(Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times)

Speculative tickets usually pop up as soon as a major artist announces a tour. Most recently, K-pop boy band BTS announced a world tour that includes four stops at SoFi Stadium. Before the general sale began Jan. 24, some sellers on Vivid Seats had already started listing tickets for over $6,000. Listings like these usually create a greater sense of scarcity, which can drive up ticket prices even more.

If enacted, the proposed legislation in California would require sellers to have event tickets in their possession before offering them for sale. The listing must include the location of the seat and specific refund rights. It prohibits a person from using software that automatically purchases more tickets than the specified limit, and it would raise the maximum civil penalty for each violation from $2,500 to $10,000.

The live music industry is a vital part of the state’s economy, contributing over $51 billion to California’s GDP and supporting over 460,000 jobs, according to the database 50 States of Music.

Ticketing fraud tends to affect more than just the consumer. Whenever an unknowing fan shows up to a venue with a fake ticket, it often falls on the venue and its staff to deal with the situation. Stephen Parker, the executive director of the National Independent Venue Association, said that if speculative tickets are banned in California, venues could save up to $50,000 in staffing expenses.

Los Angeles’ SoFi Stadium, where many concerts and ticketed live events are held.

(Icon Sportswire/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images)

“They have to deal with fans who are crying, who are angry, who are upset because they thought they were going to go see their favorite artists that night, and they paid [over the] ticket’s face value only to not get a ticket that works or to not get a ticket at all,” said Parker.

Fighting ticket fraud and reining in a ticketing giant

There are currently dozens of legislative bills throughout the U.S. focused on event ticketing issues. Some states like Maryland, Minnesota and Maine have already passed restrictions on speculative tickets.

The action comes after both the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission sued Ticketmaster and its parent company, Live Nation Entertainment, in 2024 and 2025. The DOJ’s lawsuit suggests breaking up the company, which it accuses of engaging in monopolistic practices. The complaint also alleges the company forces venues into exclusive ticketing contracts and influences artists to use only its services.

Founded in 1976, Ticketmaster has been the industry’s largest ticket distributor since 1995, with around 80% of live concerts sold through the site. The company merged with Live Nation in 2010.

Ticketmaster has also acquired a growing share of the resale market, under the platform Ticketmaster Resale. The site allows consumers to list, sell or find tickets to live events. The business functions similarly to other resale sites, but Ticketmaster does not allow speculative ticket sales on its platform.

The Federal Trade Commission is currently suing the company on accusations that it engaged in illegal ticket vendor practices for its resale business, like misleading artists and consumers with so-called “bait-and-switch pricing,” where advertised prices are lower than the actual total. Following the FTC’s complaint, the ticket seller made changes to its policies.

Additionally, Ticketmaster is no longer allowing users to have multiple accounts, which made it easier to purchase more tickets than the specified limit, and it is shutting down Trade Desk, the controversial software that helps resellers track and price tickets across several marketplaces.

Hundreds enjoy a performance by Banda Los Lagos during Jalisco Fest at the 2025 Santa Fe Springs Swap Meet.

(Genaro Molina/Los Angeles Times)

“The FTC case against us is very frustrating because we think they’re sort of blaming the victim here. We’re the ones that are dealing with millions and millions of bots attacking us every day,” said Dan Wall, Live Nation’s vice president of corporate and regulatory affairs. “We’re trying to convince the federal government and state governments to get on the same page of recognizing where the problem is, which is overwhelmingly in the resale industry, and trying to do something about it.”

“We’re a much more artist and consumer-focused company, and so we don’t engage in the different kinds of business practices that are sketchy and unfair to the fans. We try to be a much more honest, legitimate outlet for getting resale tickets,” said Wall.

Critics find that the surge of anti-speculative ticketing bills around the country is a way for Ticketmaster to divert attention from its own legal troubles and shift attention onto the resale market. Live Nation is a key supporter of the California bill. Diana Moss, the director of competition policy at the Progressive Policy Institute, called AB 1349 “overkill” when it comes to the provisions and restrictions it places on the secondary market.

Fans cheer Sexyy Red at the Rolling Loud concert at Hollywood Park in March.

(Michael Owen Baker/For The Times)

“A lot of these bills in the states are a vehicle to disable the resale markets and hinder how they operate. Resale markets are important to consumers,” said Moss. “If you disable the resale market, then fans have no place to go — but back to Ticketmaster. That’s the whole game, disable the resale markets with legislation and regulation, and then everybody has to go back and deal with Ticketmaster and pay their monopoly ticket fees.”

Provisions in AB 1349 deem a ticket a license. The question of whether a ticket is a right or a license is an ongoing controversy in the ticketing world. Opponents of the bill are fearful that this change would give more power to Live Nation, as they could impose restrictions on how the ticket can be used, such as whether you’re allowed to sell your ticket on other platforms or if you can transfer it at all. Meghan Callahan, from the Empower Fans Coalition, a group that opposes the bill, equates this licensing change to taking a lease out on the ticket.

“Ticketmaster’s goal is to create less competition. This bill imposes restrictions on everybody else but themselves,” said Callahan. “They are trying to use consumer-friendly concepts and sneak in these other provisions to embolden their monopoly.”

Wall at Ticketmaster said that nothing on the consumers’ end would change if this bill were to pass, adding that tickets are already licenses “from the venue for you to come on the property during the time of the show and sit in that seat.”

“Honesty doesn’t favor one person or another. That’s what this [bill] is about,” said Wall.