The music industry is an ever-evolving part of our culture. Because music is such a big part of our lives, there is a huge industry to support it. The more music and musical culture progresses, the more problems we will encounter. The issues and developments we face today are, for the most part, completely different from the issues and developments faced twenty years ago. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay In this essay, I intend to discuss the growing issues surrounding secondary ticketing, demonstrating a detailed understanding of ticket scalping, its effects, and the means in which to regulate it. I will also discuss the issue of current copyright issues through the real-life example of the Blurred Lines case. Secondary ticketing can also be referred to by the more common name ticket touting. The secondary ticket market negatively impacts not only live music, but also other entertainment sectors such as sporting events, theater shows and comedy. Ticket scalping occurs when tickets are purchased in bulk for events such as major concerts upon initial release with the intent to resell them at a higher price. Professional promotion companies use multiple credit cards to create multiple identities and accounts, while a more advanced and effective way to accumulate more tickets is through the use of software specially programmed to purchase these tickets, called "bots". This method is widely used among larger secondary ticketing companies. These bots have the ability to secure and purchase tickets automatically at the exact moment they go on sale. Scaling is a black mark on the music industry and in my opinion it is unfair that these characterless scalpers are allowed to gain fans who simply weren't quick enough to beat the bots for a ticket, "charging exorbitant sums in an attempt to fill your pockets." After the bots/fake accounts accumulate the tickets, they are then sold on secondary websites such as "Vivagogo", "Stubhub", "Seatwave", and "Get Me In" for a large profit. All of these secondary websites highlight the fact that when you are dealing with them, you are dealing with a secure financial website. 'Get Me In' and 'Seatwave' are actually owned by Ticketmaster who are now the largest ticket seller in the world. This to me simply highlights the fact that it is no longer about the experience of the concert or gig the consumer attends, but rather how much money can be made from the consumer. However, ticket promotion is not a new concept. Scalpers could be found selling tickets outside concerts and concerts to fans who had missed out on initial ticket sales years ago, but they usually did so at a discounted rather than inflated price. Nowadays these types of touts can still be found outside concert venues trying to sell off remaining tickets and make a few extra quid, the only difference being that behind those classic style touts lies a huge market waiting to exploit consumers . The value of the secondary ticketing market in the UK is now worth £1 billion a year, with an estimated $8 billion worldwide. An additional reason why ticket touting is so controversial is its lack of regulation. Secondary ticketing websites routinely allowviolations of consumer law. Loopholes can often be worked around in the few ticket touting rules and regulations that allow these secondary ticketing agencies to function. For example, although it is considered illegal to hack into primary agencies such as Ticketmaster to accumulate large numbers of tickets as well as use fake profiles to purchase more tickets, such legislation is rarely put into practice by agencies (such as the National Consumer Agency) police or government. However, the general redistribution of football match tickets has been banned in the UK since 1994 and countries such as Norway and France deem it illegal to resell concert tickets for profit. For example, in June 2016 Paolo Nutini had organized a benefit concert in support of a thirteen year old fan whose mother had died in her sleep and with only a limited number of tickets many fans were left disappointed. The tickets then appeared on secondary ticketing agency Vivago, costing £625 each, 15 times the initial asking price of £40. Nutini was evidently not happy about this, calling the touts "fucking shameless". In cases like this it is clear that something needs to be done to regulate secondary sales. Nutini continued, “No matter how much you want to see someone play, don't support and facilitate these sites. Protect yourself and other music fans from these exorbitant ticket prices." Nutini is not the only one regarding touts. There are also a lot of artists struggling with ticket sales. In 2016 Raidohead revealed that there would be a limit of 4 tickets per person to try to reduce secondary ticketing, as well as ensuring that the name of the person who purchased the ticket was on the ticket. Fans had to provide proof in the form of photo ID to gain entry to the Radiohead concert. Iorn Maiden can also be included in the list of artists fighting against touts. In 2010, when tickets for their UK arena tour initially went on sale, the next day 6294 tickets could be found on sites such as Seatwave and Vivago. They learned from their mistakes and welcomed a paperless ticketing system in September 2016. This was a huge success for the band with only 207 tickets available on one website alone, Vivago. The band went on to say that "With secondary ticketing much more developed now, the difference is probably much greater." pays when artists get involved in regulating their ticket sales. In relation to the law relating to secondary ticketing however, in the UK last year, the use of bots was made illegal, in my opinion this would be a good step for Ireland to take to begin the battle against touting. Although the use of bots is illegal, the act of purchasing one is not, and at the small cost of £500 many advertising agencies will find it difficult to abstain. One company I mentioned previously, StubHub, charge a 15% commission on every sale and with prices on their website reaching over £5000 (Ireland v England at Twickenham, March 2018) it's no surprise that this industry is booming . Sinn Féin TD Maurice Quinlivan has proposed a bill which would make it illegal to resell tickets on which a profit of more than 10% is made. A draft of this bill was previously outlined by Noel Rock after some tickets for U2's Joshua Tree concert in Croke Park in June 2017 ended up on sites such as Seatwave, worth a whopping €1,042. These exorbitant prices encouraged Noel tooutline the initial petition making it “unlawful for any unauthorized person to sell or offer for sale tickets to major sporting, musical or theatrical events for more than the officially designated price.” Quinlivann's current proposal has received majority support, with the exception of agencies such as Ticketmaster Ireland and Seatwave. “The media frenzy around the resale of tickets has only served to confuse the public and sensationalize the issue. Less than 1% of the tickets Ticketmaster Ireland sells on behalf of its customers are subsequently resold – a very different story to what the Irish press has told us.” It's quite clear that the situation is getting out of hand. Now it's starting to impact the relationship between fans and artists. With some fans having to pay exorbitant prices to see their favorite artists and, more often than not, fans can't afford a ticket in the first place. This in turn can impact the artist's income as fans are unable to afford the likes of concerts, records, downloads etc. due to paying an extorted sum for a ticket in the first place. Additionally, because tooters are able to charge higher prices for tickets, they essentially gain profits and earnings that the artist could potentially reap if tooters didn't exist. This could essentially lead to a decrease in the quality of live shows, a decrease in the number of live shows, or even the resignation of some artists. It could also present a lack of new artists due to dwindling money available to sign them, having a huge impact on the future of music culture. The music industry is heavily dependent on live concerts, but if people can't afford to attend live concerts due to the exorbitant prices, and if artists start to stop doing live shows, the future of the music industry could be uncertain. I will talk about the next topic. is a recent copyright infringement case, also known as the Blurred Lines case. First, copyright is a legal right granted to the creator of a work of art, music, drama, writing, etc. Copyright infringement occurs when that exclusive right is ignored and someone else attempts to reproduce a similar or exactly identical work. Copyright does not last forever and usually expires 70 years after the death of the composer/writer/author, etc. It is very difficult to comply with copyright laws as it is an extremely complex law with a wide spectrum of subsections. Copyright is a common debate among lawyers who have different opinions on how it should be interpreted and attributed. It's very common for us to break copyright law every day, it could be by uploading a video to Instagram with a song playing on the radio in the background or, in the case of most young artists without a record deal, by covering a song originally by someone else and uploading it to their own social media platform. Robin Thicke is an R&B singer from Los Angeles, who in 2013 released a song titled "Blurred Lines" in collaboration with Virginia-born Pharell Williams, along with the "IT" rapper. The song was a huge success and was the best-selling song of 2013 selling over 14.8 million units reaching number 1 in 80 countries. It is quite evident that this song was well known around the world, as it remained in the Billboard top 100 at number 1 for 12 weeks during the year of release. The song's success was soon derailed following a court case alleging that the writers of "Blurred Lines" had infringed the copyright of Marvin Gates' song "Got To Give.