**Q: Can tickets labeled as “non-refundable” be returned?**
In October, as the entertainment market thrives and concert tickets fly off the shelves, some consumers inadvertently purchase obstructed-view tickets, or what we might call “no-view” tickets. Zhang, for instance, purchased two tickets for a music festival but realized the day after that she had booked the wrong date and sought a refund. Upon contacting the ticketing company, she was informed that the ticket details clearly stated “non-refundable” once sold, so her request was denied.
Zhang’s situation isn’t unique. With the growing popularity of performances, disputes regarding ticket purchases have surged, making them a frequent source of consumer complaints. Whether it’s changes in schedules or event lineup cancellations, customers often find their refund requests rejected.
According to Article 496 of the Civil Code, standard terms are clauses set in advance for repeated use, typically not discussed during contract negotiation. The party providing these standard terms must ensure fairness in determining the rights and responsibilities of both parties, particularly in highlighting clauses that may exempt or limit their liability. If the ticketing platform fails to adequately notify or explain such terms, consumers may argue that these clauses are not part of the contract.
Major liability-related terms include those that exempt or limit the seller’s responsibility or increase the buyer’s liability, such as “non-refundable” or “no compensation.” Thus, even if the ticketing platform or organizer displayed the terms, if it limits the consumer’s right to after-sale protection, it may be declared invalid. Consumers whose rights are violated can seek legal redress.
**Q: Who bears the loss when consumers buy obstructed-view tickets?**
There are various channels through which concert tickets can be purchased, including official ticketing platforms, ticket agencies, physical outlets, social media, and auction sites. Generally, besides official platforms, ticket agencies are a primary means for viewers to buy tickets.
Per Article 925 of the Civil Code, if an agent contracts with a third party within their authority, and the third party is aware of this agency relationship, then that contract binds both the principal and the third party. If this relationship isn’t made explicit, then only a service contract exists between the ticketing platform and the consumer.
When buying tickets, consumers should carefully review the ticketing information. If the organizer clearly states they have authorized the ticketing platform for sales, that service contract binds both the platform and the organizer to the consumer. Otherwise, the responsibilities fall solely on the platform.
Given the often-high prices of concert tickets, consumers expect a rewarding experience. However, purchasing obstructed-view tickets can ruin this, resulting in a significant breach of service expectation, and therefore, the platform and organizer may be held liable for damages. If the contract doesn’t specify how to handle breaches, they should refund the ticket price, along with reasonable expenses for accommodations and transport the consumer incurred.
Consumer fraud refers to any deceptive practices that mislead customers, harming their rights. Consumers may invoke Article 55 of the Consumer Rights Protection Law to claim that the sale of obstructed-view tickets without prior notice constitutes fraud, potentially demanding a refund and tripling their compensation.
Moreover, regulations state that misleading or illegal advertising must be halted and can lead to administrative penalties. If the ticket platform or organizer misrepresented seating conditions and is found guilty of false advertising, they could face serious consequences.
In February 2023, Mr. Wu purchased a ticket for a popular singer’s concert in Haikou for 1,700 yuan. However, when he arrived, he discovered his seat was largely obstructed by scaffolding. After the concert, he successfully sued the ticketing platform and was refunded his money.
To summarize, if consumers find themselves in a similar situation, they should first communicate with the event staff to attempt a seat change. If that fails, they should gather evidence through photographs and videos, retain their ticket and payment records, and consider filing a complaint with local consumer protection agencies or mediation committees. If all else fails, legal action may be necessary.
**Q: Are concert tickets eligible for a “seven-day no-reason return”?**
Many consumers purchase concert tickets online and wonder if they can utilize the “seven-day no-reason return” principle. According to Article 25 of the Consumer Rights Protection Law, consumers can return goods purchased through online, TV, or mail orders within seven days without providing a reason, with certain exceptions for customized goods and perishable items.
However, concert tickets function differently than regular merchandise. They are time-sensitive and consumers are fully aware of the event specifics at the time of purchase, minimizing any limitations in understanding their choices. Thus, it’s generally believed within the legal context that concert tickets fall under service provision, making them ineligible for the “seven-day no-reason return.”
**Q: What legal responsibilities do artists face for lip-syncing at concerts?**
From a civil law perspective, lip-syncing at concerts can be seen as consumer fraud. Consumers can seek restitution from ticket platforms and event organizers under Article 55 of the Consumer Rights Protection Law, demanding a refund and additional compensation. It also constitutes a breach of contract, resulting in potential liabilities such as penalties, refunds, or compensation for losses incurred.
Legal regulations clearly prohibit lip-syncing and impose responsibilities on both the venue and artists to prevent it. If any issues arise, such as sound quality problems that negatively affect the concert experience, the service provider could be liable for failing to meet consumer expectations.
**Q: Are audiences allowed to live-stream or broadcast concerts?**
Recently, Dala’s concert in Nanjing attracted thousands of online viewers during live broadcasts. However, many fans capturing snippets of the performance for social media may inadvertently infringe copyright laws. The law specifies that performers have exclusive rights to control the live broadcasting of their performances, and consumers only acquire the right to view the concert, not to record or stream it.
Thus, without explicit permission, live-streaming or recording concert content constitutes copyright infringement. Consumers could face civil liability for damages and be required to cease infringing activities.
**Judge’s Advice:**
To prevent issues like obstructed-view tickets and better protect consumer rights, all parties involved must recognize their responsibilities. Organizers should prioritize consumer experience over short-term profits, ensuring seat designs minimize obstruction and providing clear warnings for restricted-view seats. If visibility is limited, ticket prices should reflect that.
Regulatory bodies must enhance administrative penalties and support consumers in their valid claims. Consumers should also be proactive in protecting their rights, maintaining all relevant evidence, and asserting their claims when facing obstructed-view ticket purchases.
