With consumer protections in mind, the Maryland General Assembly is looking to stop ticket resellers from price gouging eager concertgoers and arts fans this legislative session.

Senate Bill 539, sponsored by Sen. Dawn Gile, an Anne Arundel County Democrat, seeks to prohibit the resale of tickets purchased at face value online by people who flip them for exorbitant fees. The bill would still allow resale websites to profit off service fees, but the price of the tickets would remain affordable to interested consumers.

It would also stop the practice of third parties advertising “speculative tickets,” or selling tickets they don’t have prior to the official sale date.

Should it pass, online scalpers who do not comply could be subject to litigation from the attorney general’s office, private lawsuits and/or fines up to $1,000.

Ticket holders would still be able to transfer their tickets for events they can’t attend.

Gile is partnering with House Economic Matters Committee Chair C.T. Wilson, a Charles County Democrat, who plans to usher the bill through his chamber.

“Gone are the days where you could just wait in line [and] get your ticket,” Wilson said at a news conference Wednesday morning regarding consumer protection legislation. “Technology has allowed us to step forward and do this from our homes. The problem with that technology is it also allowed individuals to buy those tickets up first.”

Wilson explained that third-party retailers enlist bots to buy the tickets and create a demand and sell them “to the highest bidder.”

The phenomenon has moved beyond just popular concerts.

Gile said that, while the issue of third-party price gouging for tickets came to light because of popular artists like Taylor Swift, it’s begun to impact other forms of entertainment, like performances of “The Nutcracker” held at Maryland Hall in Annapolis.

“The system is broken, and it only serves these bad actors and the platforms they facilitate,” Gile said. “It doesn’t serve our artists, our venues or our Maryland consumers, and it’s time to address these issues head-on.”

Addressing ticket gouging was not the only consumer protection goal legislators rolled out Wednesday.

Gile is also partnering with Del. Sara Love, a Montgomery County Democrat, to sponsor the Maryland Online Privacy Act of 2024, which seeks to limit how tech companies collect, store and sell consumer data.

Gile’s Senate Bill 541 and Love’s House Bill 567 would minimize the kind of data companies collect, limiting it to only what is necessary and relevant to the product, which must be securely stored. The legislation would give consumers the right to know what data is being collected, who it’s being shared with and the ability to request that it be deleted. It would also prohibit companies from selling their information or use it for targeted advertising.

“Right now in Maryland there is no comprehensive privacy law, and that is a problem because companies are collecting, storing, sharing and selling our personal and sensitive data, largely without our knowledge or consent,” Love said.

Del. Jared Solomon and Sen. Ben Kramer, both Montgomery County Democrats, are jointly sponsoring the Maryland Kids Code, House Bill 901 and Senate Bill 844, which would require for-profit companies that annually gross more than $25 million with online platforms that collect data from 50,000 or more unique users to stop harvesting and selling children’s online data.

“If we allow things that happen in the online space to happen in the three-dimensional world, I don’t think any parent would be OK with that — we would be horrified,” Solomon said. “But because this is done sort of in the guise of algorithms and data management practices … companies are allowed to get away with this.”

The bill would also require companies to analyze their platforms and fix any issues that could harm young people. Solomon said the bill is “not punitive,” and provides companies with a “right to cure,” giving platforms three months to remedy any harmful aspects after they’ve been identified. If platforms don’t comply, they would be required to pay a fine of up to $2,500 per affected child for each negligent violation and up to $7,500 per affected child for each intentional violation.

The bill doesn’t require companies to remove content or limit access for young people.

Solomon said online platforms have already implemented some of the bill’s measures. Last February, Meta changed their platforms to prohibit activity-based advertising from being shown to users between ages 13 and 17. For minors who use YouTube, the platform’s default settings default to the most private.

“Here’s the bottom line: No parent would ever tolerate a pervert at their child’s bedroom window, no parent would ever tolerate a stalker following their child to school or sitting at the park and watching everything that they do,” Kramer said. “But, right now, internet companies are tracking everything that our children do.”

The fourth bill in the legislature’s consumer protections package seeks to prohibit retail energy suppliers from using predatory practices to influence Marylanders to switch energy providers by offering teaser rates, or short-term rates that appear to save money but then significantly grow in cost.

Senate Bill 1, sponsored by Senate President Pro Tem Malcolm Augustine, a Democrat from Prince George’s County, and House Bill 267, sponsored by House Economic Matters Committee Vice Chair Brian Crosby of St. Mary’s County, would stop retailers from using deceptive practices like teaser rates when pitching a switch to their company.

According to the bill’s sponsors, the competitive energy market would still exist and consumers would still be able to choose their supplier.

Augustine said that about 300,000 Maryland residents pay an average of $500 a month for their energy bills, which equates to approximately $150 million.

“We’re bringing this bill forward to protect people,” Crosby said. “No Maryland family that is busy working to keep the lights on should have to worry about getting swindled by someone promising better rates in the short-term and not telling them about the long-term effects, essentially ripping them off.”