The Supreme Court of Canada has declined to hear an appeal by Ticketmaster and Live Nation, which face class-action lawsuits in multiple provinces for allegedly profiting from third-party ticket reselling.
The case stems from allegations Ticketmaster facilitated mass ticket scalping in breach of its own terms of use and policy, allowing resellers to use automated B次元官网网址渢icket botsB次元官网网址� to scoop up event tickets beyond limits it imposes on individual buyers.
The class-action lawsuit filed in B.C. was one of five launched against the companies in 2018 after media reports about TicketmasterB次元官网网址檚 activity in the secondary ticket market.
The Toronto Star and the CBC published stories about an undercover investigation of TicketmasterB次元官网网址檚 pitch to so-called B次元官网网址渢icket resellersB次元官网网址� at a convention in Las Vegas in the summer of 2018.
In a 2023 ruling from the B.C. Court of Appeal, the panel of judges laid out the background of what spurred the lawsuits in B.C., Ontario, Saskatchewan and Quebec.
At the centre of the ensuing controversy was TicketmasterB次元官网网址檚 pitch to professional scalpers on the use of Tradedesk, an inventory software product used by resellers to B次元官网网址渧alidate and manageB次元官网网址� tickets they sell on the companyB次元官网网址檚 website.
The media reports B次元官网网址渟uggestedB次元官网网址� that the company was touting the software to ticket resellers as a means of facilitating B次元官网网址渕ass scalping,B次元官网网址� which appeared to violate the Ticketmaster websiteB次元官网网址檚 terms of use.
In B.C., lead plaintiff David Gomel claims he paid about US$437 for tickets to a Bruno Mars concert in Vancouver scheduled for July 2017.
Gomel bought the tickets from StubHub, a secondary seller of event tickets that competes with Ticketmaster.
The lawsuits hinge, in part, on claims of a B次元官网网址済eneral inflationary effectB次元官网网址� on the secondary market for tickets, forcing people to pay more than face value, in violation of consumer protection legislation and the Competition Act.
The class in British Columbia claims Ticketmaster wrongfully profited by facilitating ticket reselling, while falsely claiming that members of the public would have a B次元官网网址渇air opportunityB次元官网网址� to buy tickets at their face value rather than at inflated markups.
In its submissions to the Supreme Court of Canada, Ticketmaster argued that its purchase policy and terms of use were agreements with individuals who used the companyB次元官网网址檚 website to buy tickets, rather than B次元官网网址渞epresentationsB次元官网网址� to the public at-large.
The company claimed the B.C. Court of Appeal got it wrong when it allowed the class-action to move forward by turning a B次元官网网址渃onsumer contract into a promise to a market at-large.B次元官网网址�
Ticketmaster claimed in its Supreme Court of Canada submissions that the lawsuits it faces B次元官网网址渉ave the potential to impact every business operating an e-commerce platform in Canada by vastly enlarging the kinds of claims they may face.B次元官网网址�
The company claimed that hearing its appeal would give the high court B次元官网网址渁n opportunity to provide guidance on whether website terms of use are a sufficient factual basis for claims of misrepresentation to the public.B次元官网网址�
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the companyB次元官网网址檚 request to hear the appeal, upholding the B.C. Court of AppealB次元官网网址檚 July 2023 ruling.
The companyB次元官网网址檚 lawyer, the B.C. law firm representing the class and lead plaintiff David Gomel did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
READ ALSO:
READ ALSO:
