California has signed a new law aimed at "ghost tickets," but the fight over who carries the burden is not over. Assembly Bill 1349 bars sellers from advertising, listing or selling concert and sports tickets they do not possess or have a legal right to receive, unless an event presenter or venue authorises the sale. Governor Gavin Newsom signed the bipartisan measure after the legislative session, while warning that part of its design still needs work.
The target is speculative ticketing: listings that appear before the seller actually holds the ticket. The law also prohibits software used to bypass ticket limits, queues and presales, and restricts websites and advertising designed to resemble authorised ticket sources. Both the Los Angeles Times and CalMatters report that violations can bring misdemeanor charges and penalties.
Newsom framed the change as a consumer-protection measure, saying ticket buying should not involve hidden risks or unfair practices. Assemblymember Isaac Bryan, who authored the bill, had pointed to listings that appear before tickets go on sale. In comments reported by CalMatters, he said some buyers may pay more than the eventual sale price and, in the worst cases, may never receive the ticket they paid for.
Yet the governor signed AB 1349 with a clear reservation. His signing statement said the measure appeared to take an "uneven approach" by allowing select sellers to avoid certain obligations. He did not identify those sellers, but asked lawmakers and stakeholders to revisit the carve-out. The Los Angeles Times reports that the final version does not define resale marketplaces as speculative ticket sellers, even as it places duties on them.
Those duties are central to the dispute. Marketplaces cannot knowingly or recklessly facilitate speculative sales and must take "reasonable measures" to prevent them. California professional sports teams and venues managing their own inventory are also exempt. The National Independent Venue Association says the final law exposes independent venues, festivals and presenters while shielding resale platforms from the core definition of speculative selling.
NIVA initially supported the bill, then urged Newsom to veto the amended version. Its executive director, Stephen Parker, said the law could put small businesses and nonprofits that present shows at risk. The group is concerned that presale, VIP and waitlist sales could create liability for independent operators. That is an interpretation disputed by the Ticket Policy Forum, which represents resale platforms including StubHub and SeatGeek.
The forum's executive director, Brian Berry, said AB 1349 bans speculative sales on resale marketplaces as well and that its members will comply with the new requirements. The disagreement is not a minor footnote: it sits alongside Newsom's own call for more discussion of the carve-outs. What the law requires is clear in the reports; how the contested provisions will apply to specific ticketing practices remains an issue for the promised follow-up.
The politics behind the final text were unusual. CalMatters reports that Live Nation, which owns Ticketmaster, backed the measure when it was introduced, while StubHub lobbied against it. StubHub spent $4.4 million during the two-year legislative session on the measure and other bills, according to CalMatters, then supported the final version. A separate proposal to cap resale prices at 10% above face value stalled in the Senate Appropriations Committee in August, leaving AB 1349 as California's latest move against speculative ticketing.
Read more on Hitboard Music.