Re: ACB Cancels Ebay Tickets for Ashes

"Colin Kynoch" <colinkynoch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:_XvJg.20743$rP1.1477@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
David W wrote:

No, but so what?

Well you are the one who is saying if there is a market it should be
allowed to happen.

Don't be silly. You are undermining your own argument by pursuing this.
_Quite_ obviously, if a serious crime is committed, then that is paramount.

There's a far more important consideration in that case.

But the basic principle is still the same.

Rubbish. Did I say anywhere that market forces should take priority over
_all_ other issues?

Well, they were only able to make it their business by exploiting the
public
nature of an auction site.
So what? They entered into a contract with the purchaser of the
tickets. If the purchaser breaches the contract then CA have a right
to
void the tickets.


Don't like contracts?

Not these ones.


My problem is with how CA finds out that the contract is being breached.

If they can find out by legal means then tough.

I contend that they can't.
Scenario:
1. I buy tickets from CA's approved ticket seller.
2. A friend visits and sees the tickets sitting on the coffee table.
3. The friend notes the stand, row and seat of each ticket and offers the
tickets for sale on eBay, knowing that he can't supply the product.
4. Someone wins the auction, sends the money and the friend pockets it.
5. Nothing else happens.

I don't believe that the law would be on CA's side in a case like this,
since the ticket seller has done nothing wrong. Hell, you only have to know
by some means that tickets were sold for a certain area of the ground, even
if you don't know who bought them, to put them on eBay for sale. Why should
the legitimate buyer of the tickets lose them? The fact is that CA _CANNOT
PROVE_ that the ticket buyer offered his tickets for sale.


Final by whom? eBay? What does that have to do with CA? The actual sale
still might not have gone ahead (money and goods changing hands, which
does
not _always_ happen for completed auctions on eBay). How does CA find
out if
it did?

It doesn't need to. the very offering of the tickets is a breach of
contract.

Is it? Strange, because eBay is claiming in its defence that CA cannot prove
that tickets were sold on eBay.

as this would require examination of the bank accounts of the buyer
and
seller
and the contents of private e-mails (assuming that neither buyer nor
seller
co-operated, which neither have an interest in doing).
Not at all. The only thing that CA would have to be able to show is
that the tickets were offered for sale.

Even more Draconian.

It isn't draconian at all. There are a wide range of events that the
organisations of those events have much the same conditions. The Falls
Festival for one.

Doesn't make it less Draconian. That others do it is hardly a valid argument
in its favour.


I can change my mind and go to the cricket after all
but the tickets have been cancelled.

Well you shouldn't have offered the ticket for sale then, and you
deserve to have your ticket canceled.

Why? I bought the tickets fair and square and I want to go to the cricket.

> I don't see how CA
can legally enforce their conditions.

Because they had a contract which had amongst the conditions that you
could not sell the tickets.

And how do they know that I sold the tickets privately?

It would depend on how you sold them.

I sold them _privately_. How can CA possibly prove it if neither buyer nor
seller co-operates?

They should just *** out.
If you don;t like the terms of a contract do not enter into it

I see. An outrageous socialistic contract simply to go to the cricket.

There is nothing outrageous or socialistic about it at all. Cricket
Australia wishes to control its product which is its prerogative.

It does control its product. What it does not control, and can never legally
control, is the resale of its product, because it can never prove by legal
means that its product was resold, or even offered for sale by the buyer,
without co-operation from the buyer or seller. What I do with tickets after
I've bought them is _none_ of its business.

Just be thankful that Justin Madden did not make the Ashes series an
event covered by the Sports Event Ticketing (Fair Access) Act.

Had it been those found to have scalped would have been subject to fines
of up to $30,000 per offence.

I guess I live in a Big Brother state, then, and the government should be
turfed out.

CA is intruding in areas it has no business or legal right to intrude in. It
cannot possible enforce its conditions by legal means without co-operation
from the buyer or seller. I repeat, it should *** OUT.

David



.

Quantcast