Live Nation-Ticketmaster has agreed to settle a federal antitrust lawsuit with the Department of Justice, though the terms are not yet public. Reports indicate the settlement will not force a breakup but may include around $200 million in damages, requirements to open its platform to competitors, and caps on some fees.
Dozens of states are expected to continue their separate case, with 27 states and DC already filing for a mistrial. The judge criticized the timing of the settlement announcement, calling it "outrageous" that it was not disclosed until after jury selection.
The lawsuit was fueled by complaints over high ticket prices and exclusive contracts, with public attention heightened after Ticketmaster's crash during Taylor Swift's 2022 tour presale.
Main topics: Antitrust lawsuit settlement, state legal actions, settlement terms and criticisms, Taylor Swift/Ticketmaster crash context.
On Monday, Live Nation-Ticketmaster agreed to settle a federal antitrust lawsuit with the Department of Justice. Eight states so far have indicated they plan to join the settlement, a district attorney said in court, and four others remain unclear on their status. The case alleged that it illegally monopolized parts of the live events industry, leading to higher ticket prices for consumers and locking venues into exclusive deals. The terms of the settlement have not yet been made public, but reporting in Politico and Bloomberg suggests that it won’t force Live Nation to split off from Ticketmaster.
Live Nation settles government antitrust suit — that probably doesn’t include a breakup
Dozens of states are expected to seek a new trial.
Dozens of states are expected to seek a new trial.
27 states and DC will continue pushing their case, and have already filed for a mistrial.
Reports suggest the deal includes a sum of around $200 million in damages, plus requirements for Live Nation to open parts of its ticketing platform to competitors, loosen exclusive ticketing contracts for venues, divest some of the amphitheaters it controls, and cap Ticketmaster service fees for amphitheaters. It comes a week into a trial in a New York federal court.
Emily Peterson-Cassin, policy director at the Demand Progress Education Fund, said in a statement on Monday that “Donald Trump threw Swifties under the bus by settling with the corporate monopoly that cost them tickets to the Eras Tour. He should know ‘all too well’ that siding with a giant monopoly over the American people makes him look like ‘the smallest man who ever lived.’”
“Donald Trump threw Swifties under the bus by settling with the corporate monopoly that cost them tickets to the Eras Tour”
Taylor Swift and her legions of fans have been at the epicenter of the lawsuit against Live Nation and Ticketmaster after the ticketing platform infamously crashed in 2022 during the presale for Swift’s Eras Tour, which Ticketmaster said had “historically unprecedented demand.” The incident not only sparked outrage from Swifties, but also drew renewed attention on Ticketmaster’s stranglehold on the live entertainment industry.
Judge Arun Subramanian indicated there are three options for how to move forward: let the government continue examining the AEG COO who the DOJ was partway through questioning on Friday, give states a few days to “rearrange the chairs,” or grant their motion for a mistrial and figure out the rest from there. The court went with something close to option two — he dismissed the jury until Monday, giving him a chance to review the motion for mistrial and the states an opportunity to see if they can get what they need to continue at trial.
The judge was displeased about how the settlement came about. He said it was “outrageous” that neither party mentioned the possibility of a settlement until after jury selection. Even lead DOJ counsel David Dahlquist did not know that there was a signed term sheet indicating the details of the settlement until Monday morning, at the same time that the judge was informed. “You’re a lead counsel for the United States and you didn’t receive this term sheet until I did at 6:30 AM this morning?” Subramanian asked. “Correct,” Dahlquist said.
Attorneys for the DOJ and Live Nation told the court that Antitrust Division chief Omeed Assefi and Live Nation CEO Michael Rapino had signed the executed term sheet on March 5th, a day before counsel discussed the possibility of settlement in chambers, Subramanian said. The DOJ was partway through the examination of AEG COO by the time the trial ended Friday, causing a logistical quagmire for how to continue. On Friday morning, Subramanian said, neither side indicated to him that there was already a signed term sheet about a deal. Attorneys for both sides said they hadn’t known at the time that a tentative deal was signed. “It didn’t need to happen this way,” Subramanian said. “It shows absolute disrespect to the court, to the jury … it’s just entirely unacceptable.”
Subramanian ordered Assefi and Rapino to appear in court at 8:30 AM on Tuesday to discuss the deal.
Adam Gitlin, an attorney for the DC attorney general, told the judge that he was representing what would soon be known as the “proceeding plaintiff states” who were filing for a mistrial. In the filing posted shortly after court adjourned, DC and 27 states wrote that the mid-trial settlement “has materially and irreparably prejudiced the Plaintiff States before the currently empaneled jury, and materially altered the character of these proceedings, including by jeopardizing Plaintiff States’ access to experts, witnesses, trial exhibits, demonstratives and necessary support staff (including graphic designers, trial technicians, related personnel).”
“Now you’re saying to the court, ‘we don’t like where we are and we prefer a redo’”
Subramanian said that states should have known for a while that the DOJ may settle its portion of the case, and should have prepared to take over as lead counsel. “Now you’re saying to the court, ‘we don’t like where we are and we prefer a redo.’” Elinor Hoffmann, an attorney for the New York attorney general, said that states took steps to litigate on their own as early as January 29th when first notified about a preliminary settlement proposal, but it’s still unclear if they can retain one of the DOJ experts as a witness, among other issues. There are “good reasons for the sake of saving taxpayer dollars that we do not have 40 teams of 40 lawyers” standing by to take over a case, like might happen in private litigation, Gitlin said.
If the reported concessions in the DOJ agreement are finalized and approved by the court, they could help weaken Live Nation’s grip over the live events industry, which trial witnesses say has driven venues to stick with Ticketmaster and Live Nation out of fear of retaliation. But the proceeding states and some outside stakeholders say it will be far from sufficient.
Ahead of the public release of Monday’s settlement, New York AG Letitia James released a statement with over two dozen other state AGs condemning the DOJ’s settlement, saying, “My attorney general colleagues and I have a strong case against Live Nation, and we will continue our lawsuit to protect consumers and restore fair competition to the live entertainment industry. We will keep fighting this case without the federal government.” California Attorney General Rob Bonta said in a statement Monday, “Just in the first week of trial, we’ve already heard that Live Nation fully intended to take advantage of fans — and were able to do so because fans had no other place to go. Live Nation has manipulated the market, made itself untouchable by any competitor, and raked in the cash — not because it is better, but because it has acted illegally and created a monopoly.”
The settlement comes soon after former antitrust chief Gail Slater departed the role right before trial began. The departure and prior personnel shuffles have raised questions over the agency’s motivations and influence.
It’s not just state AGs that aren’t satisfied with the DOJ’s settlement, either. “A key reason why so much dysfunction persists in the live event marketplace is that musicians have been too often excluded from policy debates that impact them, their fans, and their communities,” said Kevin Erickson, director of the Future of Music Coalition, which advocates for artists. “In light of this, a weak settlement before any artists or managers are even allowed to take the witness stand would be a perverse and cruel outcome. We encourage state AGs to do the right thing and continue the fight for a breakup.”
Meridiano
