Ticketmaster Asks Court to Dismiss FTC Lawsuit, Arguing BOTS Act Doesn’t Apply to It

Ticketmaster has asked a federal judge to throw out the Federal Trade Commission’s lawsuit accusing it of enabling large-scale ticket scalping. The company argues that the law at the heart of the case — the Better Online Ticket Sales (BOTS) Act — was never intended to apply to ticketing platforms like Ticketmaster.

In a 34-page motion filed January 6 in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, Ticketmaster and its parent company Live Nation Entertainment call the FTC’s case an “egregious instance of agency overreach.” They argue the BOTS Act was meant to protect ticketing platforms — not regulate them.

If the court agrees, Ticketmaster would be exempt from the very law Congress passed to curb bot-driven ticket abuse — a law that would still apply to everyone else.

At the center of Ticketmaster’s motion is a narrow reading of the BOTS Act’s language, which prohibits acquiring tickets by circumventing technological safeguards and selling tickets obtained through those methods.

Ticketmaster argues that it does neither.

According to the company, resale tickets listed on its platform are sold by consumers or brokers who possess the tickets, not by Ticketmaster itself. As a result, Ticketmaster claims it cannot be liable under the BOTS Act because it does not “sell or offer to sell” resale tickets — it merely provides the marketplace where others do.

That distinction is critical to the company’s defense. Under Ticketmaster’s interpretation, the BOTS Act applies to scalpers and resellers who exploit technology to acquire tickets — but not to the dominant ticketing platform that operates both the primary and secondary markets, sets the rules governing access, and collects fees on nearly every transaction.

Until this case, the motion notes, the FTC has never attempted to enforce the BOTS Act against a ticket issuer or ticketing platform.

Ticketmaster’s Core Defense: No Bots, No Violation

The motion also challenges the FTC’s factual basis, saying regulators failed to allege a key element of a BOTS Act violation: bypassing a specific technological safeguard.

The FTC claims Ticketmaster let brokers exceed ticket limits by using multiple accounts. Ticketmaster counters that limits aren’t “technological controls” under the law, which requires proof that measures like CAPTCHAs, virtual queues, IP blocking, or account verification were actively bypassed.

The FTC’s complaint, Ticketmaster says, does not identify a single ticket obtained through the circumvention of a specific technological measure — nor does it tie any resale listing to such conduct. Ticketmaster adds that if brokers were “allowed” to exceed limits, they didn’t circumvent controls at all.

Even if brokers violated ticket limits, Ticketmaster argues the FTC has failed to show that the company knew — or should have known — that any particular ticket listed on its resale platform was illegally obtained.

General awareness of scalping isn’t enough, the motion says. Regulators must link knowledge to specific tickets and violations. Instead, the FTC relies on aggregate broker data and historical account activity — much of it outside the statute’s time limits.

The motion also seeks dismissal of the FTC’s demand for civil penalties, arguing that penalties require proof Ticketmaster knowingly violated the law — something the company says is impossible given that the BOTS Act does not clearly apply to platforms in the first place.

A Broader Pattern of Exceptionalism

Beyond the legal arguments, Ticketmaster’s stance underscores growing frustration: a company that dominates nearly every layer of live entertainment now claiming it’s exempt from the rules that govern it.

The FTC estimates Ticketmaster controls up to 80% of major U.S. concert ticketing. It runs the primary ticketing platform, a resale marketplace, artist and venue services, and — through Live Nation — concert promotion and venue ownership. Yet here, Ticketmaster claims it’s just a neutral intermediary in resale — even though it sets policies, enforces (or doesn’t enforce) limits, and collects fees on every transaction.

The motion also seeks dismissal of the FTC’s claims under Section 5 of the FTC Act, which allege deceptive practices related to ticket pricing and ticket limits.

Ticketmaster argues the pricing claims are moot, noting that it implemented all-in pricing in May 2025 following the FTC’s rule on deceptive fees. Because the challenged conduct has ended, the company argues, the FTC cannot seek injunctive relief.

As for ticket limits, Ticketmaster contends it never promised perfect enforcement — only that limits exist and that it reserves the right to cancel orders that violate them. The company argues the FTC failed to show these disclosures were false, misleading, or material to consumer decision-making.

Legal Pressure Mounting Elsewhere

The motion comes as Live Nation faces mounting legal pressure on multiple fronts. The company is already preparing for a separate antitrust trial brought by the U.S. Department of Justice, which accuses Live Nation and Ticketmaster of monopolizing markets across the live concert industry.

That case, scheduled for trial later this year, alleges Live Nation used its dominance in promotion and venues to entrench Ticketmaster as the primary ticketing provider — limiting competition at the expense of fans, artists, and independent operators.

Taken together, the cases paint a picture of a company aggressively defending not just its practices, but its position as the central gatekeeper of live entertainment — even as regulators argue that dominance carries corresponding responsibility.

A hearing on Ticketmaster’s motion to dismiss is scheduled for February 19 before U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong.

If the court accepts Ticketmaster’s argument, it would mark a significant narrowing of the BOTS Act — effectively confirming that the law applies to scalpers and resellers, but not to the largest ticketing platform in the country.

For fans frustrated by bots, hidden fees, and soaring resale prices, the optics are hard to ignore: a system where the rules apply to everyone — except the company that built it.

Ticketmaster’s Motion to Dismiss (PDF):