Bear in mind these traditional Bollywood movies from the Nineteen Eighties and 90s, the place a personality whispers, “Das ka bees, das ka bees,” whereas flashing a pocketful of tickets? That playful portrayal of ticket scalping as a fast money-making scheme has develop into a well-recognized trope. However the actuality of scalping as we speak is much from charming — it’s a predatory apply that goes unnoticed except somebody falls prey to it.
What started as a survival intuition — hoarding — has developed right into a software for revenue. Now, as a substitute of necessities, individuals hoard entry. The frenzy is clear when tickets for occasions like Diljit Dosanjh’s or Coldplay’s live shows, promote out inside minutes — solely to reappear on-line at exorbitant costs.
From IPL matches to music festivals, on-line ticket scalping has develop into a widespread phenomenon. Whereas ticketing platforms and restricted rules try to curb the apply, the absence of stringent authorities intervention has allowed it to flourish unchecked.
Traditionally, ticket scalping in India was synonymous with black advertising. Exterior cinema halls, distributors ran the “Dus-Ka-Bees” scheme, exploiting demand for blockbuster movies. Over time, the apply has developed right into a extra subtle operation, migrating on-line. Scalpers now use bots and automatic instruments to hoard tickets in bulk, leaving extraordinary customers struggling to safe entry to in style occasions.
In some instances, occasion organisers themselves manipulate provide by withholding a portion of tickets from preliminary gross sales. Utilizing bots and auto-refreshers, these tickets are rapidly resold via secondary platforms at inflated costs, creating synthetic shortage.
A notable instance is the case of Mandeep Singh v. State of Chandigarh (2015), the place a vendor was arrested for reselling World Cup match tickets on eBay and charged beneath Part 66A of the Data Know-how Act and Part 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for fraud. The petitioner sought the quashing of the FIR, arguing that Part 66A had been struck down by the Supreme Courtroom in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015), and that no case beneath Part 420 was made out since there was no intent to cheat.
The Courtroom acknowledged that Part 66A had certainly been struck down and famous that no offence beneath Part 420 IPC was established, as there was no inducement or deceit concerned — the petitioner had brazenly disclosed the upper worth of the tickets, and there was no authorized prohibition towards reselling them. The Courtroom held that persevering with the proceedings would quantity to an abuse of the method of legislation and affirmed that, “In India, there isn’t any authorized restriction towards reselling match tickets.”
Loopholes in regulation and client safety
Though Rule 4(11) of the Client Safety (E-Commerce) Guidelines, 2020, prohibits e-commerce platforms from manipulating costs to realize unreasonable income, its enforcement stays weak.
Within the case of Diljit Dosanjh’s Dil-Luminati Tour live performance, a authorized discover was filed alleging malpractice within the sale of tickets. It was claimed that the organisers opened ticket gross sales sooner than marketed, leading to speedy sellouts. This sudden availability and ticket unavailability had been interpreted as manipulative techniques to inflate demand and costs, doubtlessly constituting an unfair commerce apply beneath the Client Safety Act.
“Since tax legal responsibility can solely be imposed on sellers, and most ticket-selling web sites should not registered in India, they evade taxes. Occasions utilising authorities sources necessitate a authorized framework to safe tax advantages and shield client rights,” says Ayush Kaushik, an Advocate on the Supreme Courtroom of India.
In a grievance filed by lawyer Amit Vyas relating to ticketing practices for the upcoming Coldplay live performance in Mumbai, it was alleged that BookMyShow engaged in unethical practices that obstructed real followers from buying tickets. The grievance accused the platform of permitting bots to buy tickets, which then appeared on resale platforms at exorbitant costs, suggesting doable collusion between BookMyShow and third-party resellers.
The grievance cited a number of sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, that might be relevant to the alleged scalping actions. These embrace:
Part 111(2): Organised Crime – If scalping is organised to control ticket costs, it might be seen as an financial offence beneath organised crime, particularly if coercion or fraud is concerned.
Part 318(4): Dishonest – If customers are deceived into overpaying attributable to dishonest practices, this might be categorised as dishonest.
Part 316(2): Felony Breach of Belief – If a ticketing platform misuses tickets for resale at inflated costs, it might be seen as a breach of belief.
Part 61(2): Felony Conspiracy – If a number of events conspire to control ticket availability via unlawful means, this might be thought-about a felony conspiracy.
What are the authorized implications of scalping in India?
India’s ticket scalping problem is addressed via legal guidelines just like the Client Safety Act, Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, and state-specific laws. As an illustration, Rajasthan Entertainments and Commercials Act (1957) and Maharashtra Entertainments Responsibility Act (1923) prohibit ticket resale for revenue and above face worth, respectively.
Part 3 of the Competitors Act, 2002, prohibits anti-competitive agreements and practices. Whereas ticket scalping might theoretically contain collusive behaviour geared toward manipulating market provide and pricing, proving such casual preparations is inherently troublesome. Ticket scalping sometimes entails particular person transactions that aren’t simply categorised as collusive behaviour, hindering efficient authorized motion. Moreover, the Act doesn’t particularly goal the problem of scalping, limiting its applicability in client safety contexts.
The Client Safety Act, 2019 contains provisions towards unfair commerce practices. In response to Part 2(47) of the Act, an “unfair commerce apply” refers to any methodology adopted to advertise the sale, use, or provide of products or providers that entails deceitful, false, or deceptive representations or actions. These practices can embrace: Deceptive the general public in regards to the worth of products or providers, implying they’re offered at a daily price when they don’t seem to be. Hoarding or destruction of products, or refusal to promote items or present providers in a fashion that raises the price of items or providers (as outlined in Part 2(47)(v)).
Within the context of ticket scalping, if a ticketing platform or organiser engages in hoarding by intentionally proscribing the provision of tickets to create synthetic shortage, this might be labeled as an unfair commerce apply. For instance, if a platform sells tickets however concurrently makes use of bots to purchase up a good portion for resale at inflated costs, it might be seen as hoarding.
Whereas the Client Safety Act supplies some protections, its enforcement mechanisms are primarily designed for direct gross sales relatively than the complexities of resale. Furthermore, the absence of specific anti-scalping provisions makes it difficult for customers to hunt redress.
“Client Safety Guidelines, 2020 require sellers to confirm ticket authenticity. Nonetheless, since tickets are offered via third-party web sites, there’s no grievance redressal mechanism for consumers,” says Ayush Kaushik.
The BNS, the IT Act, the Client Safety Act, and the Competitors Act, collectively illustrate the fragmented and ineffective strategy to addressing ticket scalping. The dearth of cohesive laws creates important gaps in client safety, permitting scalping to persist.
Scalping rules in different international locations
Internationally, international locations fight ticket scalping via laws. France prohibits resale above face worth with out organiser consent, whereas within the US, states like New York and California prohibit resales to face worth. The UK has amended its Client Act and Felony Code to handle the problem.
In Australia, Eventim UK Ltd v. Vivendi Common SA case in 2009 bolstered contract enforcement towards unauthorised resales. The Truthful Buying and selling Act in New South Wales limits resale costs to 10% above face worth, whereas the Ticket Scalping Act 2018 penalises each utilization.
The UK’s Client Rights Act 2015 mandates transparency in reselling, with the CMA efficiently difficult Viagogo in Watson v. Viagogo. The Digital Economic system Act 2017 enhances client protections, whereas R v. Andrew Lee and Peter Hunter resulted in scalper convictions beneath the Fraud Act 2006. In Canada, the Ontario Ticket Gross sales Act 2017 bans bots and caps resale costs at 50% above face worth, reflecting a worldwide pattern in the direction of stricter ticket scalping rules.
International locations are leveraging know-how to fight ticket scalping, adopting options similar to blockchain know-how for safe ticketing techniques and AI-powered platforms to detect uncommon gross sales patterns. Nonetheless, fashionable know-how complicates enforcement, enabling corporations to use regulatory gaps and hinder native legislation enforcement.
Initiatives like Fanz and GUTS utilise blockchain for authenticity and trackability, enhancing safety and transparency in ticketing techniques. Advocate Mishi Choudhary, founding father of SFLC.in, an advocacy platform that works for digital rights, nonetheless, says that blockchain may also help with authenticity, not scalping. “For scalping, regulating costs is simpler.”
Proposed options
To fight ticket scalping successfully, there’s a want for central laws, contemplating worldwide greatest practices and stakeholder influence, to make sure leisure stays accessible to all.
“This can be a matter which requires consideration on the Central degree… somebody within the Ministry of Finance and everybody ought to have a look,” says Vyas.
Proposed options embrace establishing particular anti-scalping laws that clearly defines scalping practices and descriptions penalties, alongside capping resale costs at an inexpensive degree, similar to 10% above the unique worth, to discourage scalping whereas permitting flexibility for real resellers.
Choudhary highlights the BOTS Act as a very good instance of laws addressing automated ticket purchases resulting in scalping. The Act requires disclosure necessities, monitoring, and reporting.
Encouraging major ticketing platforms to create managed secondary markets can improve transparency whereas implementing stricter penalties for scalpers and consumers would emphasise the seriousness of this problem. Kaushik suggests obligatory ticket gross sales via Indian entities to fight black advertising and tax evasion, with felony prosecution for violations.
Sturdy information privateness rules needs to be launched to guard client information and improve the integrity of ticket gross sales. Moreover, Vyas suggests implementing Blockchain know-how and forming a committee with a retired choose and cyber knowledgeable to supply tips to fight ticket scalping. Lastly, it’s essential to handle potential scalping practices by organisers themselves, who might manipulate ticket availability to drive up costs, doubtlessly violating the Client Safety Act, 2019.
By drawing on world greatest practices and implementing efficient technological options, India can create a fairer and extra equitable ticketing atmosphere that safeguards client pursuits whereas selling a clear and aggressive market.
Naina Bhargava is a lawyer and the Founder and Editor at The Philosophy Undertaking.
