Live Nation Found Liable for Unlawful Monopoly; Potential Ticketmaster Sale on the Horizon

Live Nation Found Liable for Unlawful Monopoly; Potential Ticketmaster Sale on the Horizon

A jury in New York has determined that Live Nation operates an unlawful monopoly affecting various sectors of the concert industry. The implications of this verdict are yet to unfold.

The verdict, delivered on April 15 after a month-long trial and four days of jury deliberations, is confined to findings of liability. Jurors were tasked with assessing whether Live Nation monopolized the primary concert ticketing market and unlawfully compelled artists to utilize its promotional services to perform at its amphitheaters. The jury responded affirmatively to all charges.

Legal Proceedings and Future Implications

Live Nation plans to request U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian to overturn the jury’s verdict and rule in its favor. If the judge declines this request, he will be responsible for determining the practical consequences of the ruling, including potential financial damages and operational changes for Live Nation.

Critics, including state attorneys general involved in the trial, argue that the remedy should involve the forced divestiture of Ticketmaster. Their antitrust case posits that Live Nation’s dual control over ticketing and artist promotion provides it with an unfair competitive advantage, particularly as it threatens to withhold concerts from venues that do not use Ticketmaster as their primary ticketing service. The jury’s decision may be seen as an endorsement of this perspective.

Judge Subramanian might also allow Live Nation to retain Ticketmaster while mandating the sale of other assets, such as specific amphitheaters. Lauren Spahn, an entertainment partner at the law firm Buchalter, suggests that this could serve as a strategic approach to “weaken [Live Nation and Ticketmaster] without completely dismantling the combined companies.”

Historical Context of Antitrust Actions

While judges have historically had the authority to break up companies, such actions have become increasingly rare in contemporary legal contexts. For instance, in 2024, a federal judge found Google liable for monopolizing the online search market but opted against ordering the forced divestiture of its Chrome browser or Android operating system.

In this case, Judge Subramanian could impose operational constraints on Live Nation without resorting to a complete breakup. Such constraints might include limiting exclusive ticketing contracts, capping fees, or requiring the company to permit rival promoters access to its amphitheaters. Live Nation has already agreed to implement several changes to its business practices and establish a $280 million payment fund as part of a proposed settlement with the Department of Justice (DOJ) initiated shortly after the trial commenced. The company expressed confidence that the ultimate outcome of the states’ case would not significantly differ from what is outlined in the DOJ settlement.

Complications Ahead

The situation may become more complex as the proposed settlement requires Judge Subramanian’s approval. Several state attorneys general who initially partnered with the DOJ in the lawsuit have criticized the settlement as overly lenient, leading them to pursue the trial independently. This places Judge Subramanian in a challenging position, as he is being asked by two sets of government agencies—once collaborators—to both approve a settlement and impose a stricter structural remedy based on the same facts. Kenneth Dintzer, an antitrust partner at Crowell & Moring with 33 years of experience at the DOJ, remarked that this scenario is “unprecedented.”

The process is expected to be lengthy. Judge Subramanian may take months, or even up to a year, to gather all necessary arguments and evidence to reach detailed decisions regarding both the settlement and the proposed remedies. Following this, Live Nation has indicated it “can and will appeal any unfavorable rulings,” which could extend the proceedings for at least another year.

As reported by www.billboard.com.

Explore the latest digital editions of FAME Delivered in the Magazine section.

Published on 2026-04-16 04:15:00 • By FAME Delivered News Desk

Live Nation Found Liable for Unlawful Monopoly; Potential Ticketmaster Sale on the Horizon

Live Nation Found Liable for Unlawful Monopoly; Potential Ticketmaster Sale on the Horizon

A jury in New York has determined that Live Nation operates an unlawful monopoly affecting various sectors of the concert industry. The implications of this verdict are yet to unfold.

The verdict, delivered on April 15 after a month-long trial and four days of jury deliberations, is confined to findings of liability. Jurors were tasked with assessing whether Live Nation monopolized the primary concert ticketing market and unlawfully compelled artists to utilize its promotional services to perform at its amphitheaters. The jury responded affirmatively to all charges.

Legal Proceedings and Future Implications

Live Nation plans to request U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian to overturn the jury’s verdict and rule in its favor. If the judge declines this request, he will be responsible for determining the practical consequences of the ruling, including potential financial damages and operational changes for Live Nation.

Critics, including state attorneys general involved in the trial, argue that the remedy should involve the forced divestiture of Ticketmaster. Their antitrust case posits that Live Nation’s dual control over ticketing and artist promotion provides it with an unfair competitive advantage, particularly as it threatens to withhold concerts from venues that do not use Ticketmaster as their primary ticketing service. The jury’s decision may be seen as an endorsement of this perspective.

Judge Subramanian might also allow Live Nation to retain Ticketmaster while mandating the sale of other assets, such as specific amphitheaters. Lauren Spahn, an entertainment partner at the law firm Buchalter, suggests that this could serve as a strategic approach to “weaken [Live Nation and Ticketmaster] without completely dismantling the combined companies.”

Historical Context of Antitrust Actions

While judges have historically had the authority to break up companies, such actions have become increasingly rare in contemporary legal contexts. For instance, in 2024, a federal judge found Google liable for monopolizing the online search market but opted against ordering the forced divestiture of its Chrome browser or Android operating system.

In this case, Judge Subramanian could impose operational constraints on Live Nation without resorting to a complete breakup. Such constraints might include limiting exclusive ticketing contracts, capping fees, or requiring the company to permit rival promoters access to its amphitheaters. Live Nation has already agreed to implement several changes to its business practices and establish a $280 million payment fund as part of a proposed settlement with the Department of Justice (DOJ) initiated shortly after the trial commenced. The company expressed confidence that the ultimate outcome of the states’ case would not significantly differ from what is outlined in the DOJ settlement.

Complications Ahead

The situation may become more complex as the proposed settlement requires Judge Subramanian’s approval. Several state attorneys general who initially partnered with the DOJ in the lawsuit have criticized the settlement as overly lenient, leading them to pursue the trial independently. This places Judge Subramanian in a challenging position, as he is being asked by two sets of government agencies—once collaborators—to both approve a settlement and impose a stricter structural remedy based on the same facts. Kenneth Dintzer, an antitrust partner at Crowell & Moring with 33 years of experience at the DOJ, remarked that this scenario is “unprecedented.”

The process is expected to be lengthy. Judge Subramanian may take months, or even up to a year, to gather all necessary arguments and evidence to reach detailed decisions regarding both the settlement and the proposed remedies. Following this, Live Nation has indicated it “can and will appeal any unfavorable rulings,” which could extend the proceedings for at least another year.

As reported by www.billboard.com.

Explore the latest digital editions of FAME Delivered in the Magazine section.

Published on 2026-04-16 04:15:00 • By FAME Delivered News Desk

Latest Posts

Latest Posts

Don't Miss

Subscribe

To be updated with all the latest news, offers and special announcements.