Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Commitments and Contingencies	Sep. 30, 2022
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies The Company's principal commitments consist of obligations under the 2025 Notes and 2026 Notes (including principal and coupon interest), operating leases for office space, as well as non-cancellable purchase commitments. See Note 14, "Debt" and Note 11 "Leases" for contractual obligations to settle commitments relating to the 2025 Notes, 2026 Notes and operating leases for office space. During the nine months ended September 30, 2022, the Company entered into a purchase commitment with a third-party payment services provider. The Company plans to use the provider’s onboarding service for its creators, and other potential services, which are expected to streamline the Company’s payment infrastructure. The fees for this service will depend on certain volume and territory based rates. The Company expects to commence services by April 1, 2023. As of September 30, 2022, the Company's contractual obligation to settle the minimum fee commitment related to these services is $4.5 million, which is expected to be paid based on usage over a three year term ending March 31, 2026. Other than as described above, there were no material changes outside the Company's normal course of business in its commitments under contractual obligations from those disclosed in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021. Litigation and Loss Contingencies In addition to the litigation discussed below, from time to time, the Company may become a party to litigation and subject to claims incident to the ordinary course of business, including intellectual property claims, labor and employment claims, breach of contract claims, tax and other matters. Future litigation may be necessary to defend the Company or its creators. The results of any current or future litigation cannot be predicted with certainty, and regardless of the outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on the Company because of defense and settlement costs, diversion of management resources and other factors. The Company accrues estimates for resolution of legal and other contingencies when losses are probable and reasonably estimable. The Company's assessment of losses is re-evaluated each accounting period and is based on all available information, including impact of negotiations, settlements, rulings, advice of legal counsel and other information and events pertaining to each case. Nevertheless, it is possible that additional future legal costs including settlements, judgments, legal fees and other related defense costs could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, consolidated financial position, results of operations or liquidity. The matters discussed below summarize the Company’s current ongoing pending litigation. Refund Policy Arbitration On June 4, 2020, three plaintiffs, seeking to represent a proposed class of individuals who purchased tickets on or after June 3, 2016, filed suit against the Company in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, in a case captioned Snow, et al. v. Eventbrite, Inc., Case No. 20-cv-03698 (the Class Action). Plaintiffs allege that Eventbrite failed to provide an opportunity for purchasers of tickets to events sold through Eventbrite’s platform to obtain a refund where the event is postponed, rescheduled, or canceled. Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief in addition to restitution and monetary damages under California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act, False Advertising Law, and Unfair Competition Law, in addition to claims brought under California common law. The Company denies the allegations and intends to defend the case vigorously. Prior to answering Plaintiffs’ complaint, Eventbrite brought a motion to compel arbitration pursuant to its Terms of Service. The Court denied that motion. The Company thereafter answered Plaintiffs’ Complaint and brought a second motion to compel arbitration, based in part on facts established via the Company’s Answer. The Court granted that motion on September 2, 2021, and stayed the suit pending the results of arbitration. Two of the named Plaintiffs have since initiated individual arbitrations pursuant to the Company’s Terms of Service. The Company has filed responses to Plaintiffs’ demands for arbitration, denying any and all liability. The cases are in their early stages. The Company is unable to predict the likely outcome at this point. Securities Litigation Beginning on April 15, 2019, purported stockholders of the Company filed two putative securities class action complaints in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, and three putative securities class action complaints in the Superior Court of California for the County of San Mateo, against the Company, certain of its executives and directors, and its underwriters for the Company's initial public offering (IPO). Some of these actions also name as defendants venture capital firms that were investors in the Company as of the IPO. On August 22, 2019, the federal court consolidated the two pending actions (the Federal Action). On October 11, 2019, the lead plaintiffs in the Federal Action filed an amended consolidated complaint. That complaint alleged that the Company misrepresented and/or omitted material information in its IPO offering documents in violation of the Securities Act. It also challenged public statements made after the IPO in violation of the Exchange Act. The amended complaint sought unspecified monetary damages and other relief on behalf of investors. On December 11, 2019, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. On April 28, 2020, the court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss in its entirety with leave to amend and set a deadline of June 24, 2020 for lead plaintiffs to file their second amended consolidated complaint. On June 22, 2020, the Court extended lead plaintiffs' deadline to file their second amended consolidated complaint to August 10, 2020. On July 29, 2020, the Company entered into a settlement agreement with the lead plaintiffs in the Federal Action. On August 27, 2020, the lead plaintiffs in the Federal Action filed a motion for preliminary approval of the settlement. On October 30, 2020, the Court issued an order continuing the preliminary approval hearing. On January 22, 2021, the Court issued an order denying without prejudice the motion for preliminary approval. On February 9, 2021, the Company gave notice to the lead plaintiff that, in light of the denial of the preliminary approval motion, it was terminating the settlement agreement. On June 27, 2022, the Court dismissed the Federal Action with prejudice. Plaintiffs deadline to file an appeal with respect to this dismissal was July 27, 2022, and no such appeal was filed. On June 24, 2019, the state court consolidated two state actions pending at that time (the State Action). On July 24, 2019, the two plaintiffs in the State Action filed a consolidated complaint. The consolidated complaint generally alleged that the Company misrepresented and/or omitted material information in its IPO offering documents, in violation of the Securities Act, and sought unspecified monetary damages and other relief on behalf of investors. On August 23, 2019, defendants filed demurrers to the consolidated complaint, which the court sustained with leave to amend at a hearing on November 1, 2019. Plaintiffs filed a first amended consolidated complaint (FAC) on February 10, 2020. Defendants filed demurrers to the FAC on March 26, 2020. On June 23, 2020, the court sustained the demurrers with leave to amend. On November 9, 2020, the plaintiffs filed their second amended consolidated complaint (SAC). On November 20, 2020, defendants filed demurrers to the SAC, which were overruled on December 17, 2020. On January 15, 2021, defendants filed their answers to the SAC. On January 22, 2021, the plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification. On February 17, 2021, the Court entered a class certification order. On October 26, 2021, the Company entered into a binding settlement agreement with the plaintiffs in the State Action. In connection with the settlement, the Company and its insurers have paid $19.3 million. The settlement was preliminarily approved on November 5, 2021, and, on June 10, 2022, the Court entered judgment and ordered final approval of the settlement. The deadline to file an appeal in connection with the judgment and order of final settlement approval was August 9, 2022, and no such appeal was filed. Commercial Contract Litigation On June 18, 2020, the Company filed a Complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against M.R.G. Concerts Ltd. (MRG) and Matthew Gibbons (Gibbons), asserting claims for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, declaratory judgment, unfair competition, and common counts under California law, arising out of MRG and Gibbons’s termination of certain contracts with the Company and their refusal to make various payments to the Company required by those contracts. MRG asserted counterclaims against the Company for breach of one of the contracts in issue, as well as for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, unfair competition, and declaratory judgment. A jury trial commenced on May 16, 2022. On May 23, 2022, the jury issued a verdict in Eventbrite’s favor and awarded the Company $11.0 million in damages. MRG filed a motion seeking to reduce the verdict or hold a new trial, and the Company filed a motion for pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as well as to recover its attorneys’ fees and costs of suit per the parties’ contracts. On November 1, 2022, the Court denied MRG’s motion, and granted the Company’s motion. MRG’s deadline to file any appeal has not yet lapsed. The Company cannot predict whether MRG will seek to appeal, or the likelihood of success should MRG do so. The Company has not recorded any gain in relation to this verdict for the nine months ended September 30, 2022. Tax Matters The Company is currently under audit in certain jurisdictions with regard to indirect tax matters. The Company establishes reserves for indirect tax matters when it determines that the likelihood of a loss is probable, and the loss is reasonably estimable. Accordingly, the Company has established a reserve for the potential settlement of issues related to sales and other indirect taxes in the amount of $6.8 million and $11.1 million as of September 30, 2022 and December 31, 2021, respectively. These amounts, which represent management’s best estimates of its potential liability, include potential interest and penalties of $1.9 million and $2.2 million as of September 30, 2022 and December 31, 2021, respectively. The Company does not believe that any ultimate liability resulting from any of these matters will have a material adverse effect on its business, consolidated financial position, results of operations or liquidity. However, the outcome of these matters is inherently uncertain. Therefore, if one or more of these matters were resolved against the Company for amounts in excess of management’s expectations, the Company’s financial statements, including in a particular reporting period in which any such outcome becomes probable and estimable, could be materially adversely affected. Indemnification In the ordinary course of business, the Company enters into contractual arrangements under which the Company agrees to provide indemnification of varying scope and terms to business partners and other parties with respect to certain matters, including, but not limited to, losses arising out of the breach of such agreements, intellectual property infringement claims made by third parties, and other liabilities relating to or arising from the Company’s online ticketing platform or the Company’s acts or omissions. In these circumstances, payment may be conditional on the other party making a claim pursuant to the procedures specified in the particular contract. Further, the Company’s obligations under these agreements may be limited in terms of time and/or amount, and in some instances, the Company may have recourse against third parties for certain payments. In addition, the Company has indemnification agreements with its directors and executive officers that require the Company, among other things, to indemnify them against certain liabilities that may arise by reason of their status or service as directors or officers. The terms of such obligations vary.