illegal ticket sale on ebay

[Facetimer]

[quote jtwcornell91]


I like living in a world where I can buy tickets at face value.  To help promote that, I only sell tickets for either face value or what they actually cost me.  I also want to see the laws that make it harder to scalp tickets enforced.  But then I'm practically a communist.[/quote]

Is this guy driving up the market?  Are prices out of control because of this guy?  Relax, John.  Are you even planning on purchasing a ticket at all to this game?  We all know, including frequent posters to eLynah like yourself, that there are pleanty of tickets available at face value.  Even to Harvard.

Really?  I don't have them in front of me, but I'm pretty sure that each ticket on my season ticket sheet has $15 printed on it.

I graduated two years ago, and they weren't printed on them then.  I stand corrected.

[Facetimer]

[quote KeithK]I find this hard to believe.  If the ticket is part of a season ticket package then the seller knows roughly how much each ticket is worth.[/quote]

As the statute clearly state, it doesn't matter what the seller believes, they call it face value for a reason.  Certainly the Harvard ticket has a higher supply/demand factor thus if there is no value indicated, one could easily say the ticket is worth more than $15.00. If Cornell wants to prevent tickets being sold above "face value," they are the ones that have to declare what it is.  

By the way, the law also includes a proviso which allows the scalpee to recover damages, cost and attorneys fees.  Why don't you buy this guy's ticket and then sue him.  I bet Beeeeej will represent you and submit an inflated bill for his fees in an attempt to recover more than he is worth.  This way you accomplish two very important goals: (1) you get to go to the game; and (2) you don't look like a communist like John T. Whelan.

[jtwcornell91]

[quote Facetimer](2) you don't look like a communist like John T. Whelan.[/quote]

It's the beard, isn't it? :-}

[ctenah]

ummm, we are such nerds. ::smashfreak::

[KeithK]

I actually don't like anti-scalping laws, so no law suit from me. I may think the guy is acting like a jerk trying to gouge Cornell fans, but he should have a legal right to do it.  Just trying to figure out how a court would interpret "face value" as meaning anything other than what the person paid for it (total package price divided by number of games).  Now I suppose this depends entirely on the wording of the statute and if it uses the term "face value" then what the court decideds this term means.  Unfortunately legal interpretations don't always match common sense ones though.  Sometimes it seems like they usually don't.

[Beeeej]

[quote Cop at Lynah]Cornell doesn't limit the resale of the ticket but New York State does.[/quote]

Cornell's ticket policies state that anybody found to be reselling a ticket at a price higher than New York State law allows may have their entire season ticket rescinded.  I believe that's been true for at least two years.

[quote Cop at Lynah]The "scalping" laws were amended I believe in 2004-05[/quote]

The changes don't go into effect until June 1, 2007.  In the meantime, the old law is still in effect as follows:

[quote Cop at Lynah]and it basically states that if your venue is smaller than 6,000 then you can not resale for more than 15% of the face value.[/quote]

If the venue is smaller than 6,000 the limit is 20% over face value.

[quote Cop at Lynah]If the venue is larger than 6,000 than you can get what the market brings.[/quote]

If the venue is larger than 6,000 the limit is 45% over face value.

[quote Cop at Lynah]The problem with this particular situation is that Cornell does not print the value (price) on the ticket thus making prosecution nearly impossible.[/quote]

As has been pointed out, every ticket now has a price printed on it.

The post-6/1/07 law is a little less clear, but believe it or not, it seems more onerous, not less.  If I'm understanding it correctly, Cornell will be required to print the price on the ticket, and will be required to print its "maximum premium" on the ticket as well.  This means Cornell gets to decide how much over face value you're allowed to resell for - but in no event can Cornell make that premium more than $2.  I'm willing to believe that I don't understand the impending change correctly, and would welcome clarification from anybody who does.

"Cop at Lynah" is probably a true statement.

Beeeej

[anon]

Well, some idiot stepped in at the last minute and paid $150

[ugarte]

[quote KeithK]Just trying to figure out how a court would interpret "face value" as meaning anything other than what the person paid for it (total package price divided by number of games).[/quote]It has been pointed out that the price is on the ticket, so this is largely moot, but ...

Assuming Facetimer was right and there was no "face value," on the ticket, court enforcement is almost beside the point. People here were asking eBay to cancel a sale for being too far above face value. If the ticket had no obvious indicia of price, eBay would probably be reluctant to cancel a sale at the request of any party except Cornell.

[KeithK]

I agree with you that eBay wouldn't want to cancel the sale.  Why would they believe you or me as to what the ticket was worth?  I was just making the point that I wouldn't expect that argument to holdup as a point of law.

[Beeeej]

eBay already relies on the information given to it by the seller, and is generally unwilling to take anyone else's word for it.  Besides, as has been mentioned, "reporting" the auction involves simply entering the item number; you can't include a comment, send them a photo of a sample ticket with its face value legible, or explain that someone's lying about where they live.  I'm pretty firmly convinced the only reason they have the rules available for users to read, and systems in place to "report" violations, is so they don't have any liability themselves.

If any actual enforcement is likely to happen, it's going to be from Gene.  Unless someone feels like dragging the Ithaca Police into it, which I suppose wouldn't be completely unwarranted if we're really talking about enforcement.

Beeeej

[anon]

I suppose the issue is dead now.  Presumably the buyer is not registered with ebay as being in New York as the final sale price is over $145 (max. the seller indicated for New York residents).  If the money is transfered through PayPal then the only real transaction taking place in New York is the physical transfer of the ticket so there is no law enforcement angle.

Anyway, nobody addressed what I asked earlier about whether an organization has a right to select its audience through pricing.  If Cornell wants to underprice its tickets relative to demand do they have a right to prevent a secondary market?

[Beeeej]

[quote anon]If the money is transfered through PayPal then the only real transaction taking place in New York is the physical transfer of the ticket so there is no law enforcement angle.[/quote]

If the PayPal account holder is in New York, as is likely the case here, the financial transaction very much takes place in New York.  There is no separate jurisdiction called "cyberspace," and transfering funds there doesn't exempt you from the laws of the state where you sit.

[quote anon]Anyway, nobody addressed what I asked earlier about whether an organization has a right to select its audience through pricing.  If Cornell wants to underprice its tickets relative to demand do they have a right to prevent a secondary market?[/quote]

An event ticket is a purchased license.  Cornell may condition the purchase of that license just about any way it wants to, as long as it's legal - and insisting that you obey the laws of New York State is pretty legal.

Beeeej

[Rosey]

[quote Beeeej]An event ticket is a purchased license.[/quote]
It's not this simple.  No, IANAL, but from what I understand the doctrine of first sale limits what a seller may enforce on purchasers through license agreements, the exact details of which depend on the class of good or service being sold.

This is the reason why used CD stores have been blessed by the courts despite the efforts of record labels to restrict resale through end-user license agreements.

Cheers,
Kyle

[Beeeej]

[quote krose][quote Beeeej]An event ticket is a purchased license.[/quote]
It's not this simple.  No, IANAL, but from what I understand the doctrine of first sale limits what a seller may enforce on purchasers through license agreements, the exact details of which depend on the class of good or service being sold.

This is the reason why used CD stores have been blessed by the courts despite the efforts of record labels to restrict resale through end-user license agreements.[/quote]

Of course it's not an absolute, but you're comparing apples and oranges.

Besides, anybody who wishes to challenge Cornell's right to enforce their policies on season ticket holders has as much access to the courts as the used CD stores do.  I wish them the best of luck.

Beeeej

[anon]

Beeeej, In the prior sentence I said that I was assuming the buyer was not in New York.  I assume (incorrectly perhaps) that ebay will prevent a user registered in New York from exceding the maximum bid.  I was not making a judgement about cyberspace.