Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. (“Live Nation”), which acquired Ticketmaster in 2010, recently reached a surprise mid-trial settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) in a high-profile antitrust case in the Southern District of New York. The lawsuit, brought under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, was joined by attorneys general from 39 states and the District of Columbia. It challenges Live Nation’s vertically integrated control of the live concert industry—spanning promotion, venue ownership, and ticketing—and seeks structural relief, including divestiture of Ticketmaster.
The complaint alleges that Live Nation has maintained monopoly power across markets related to “major concert venues” (“MCVs”) and “major concert amphitheaters” (“MCAmps”) by using its market power to exclude rivals, coerce artists, and overcharge fans.
Claims Dismissed on Summary Judgment
On February 18, 2026, U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian granted summary judgment on several of plaintiffs’ proposed market definitions. The court rejected: (1) a distinct artist-facing market for promotion services at MCVs, finding insufficient evidence distinguishing these services from promotion at other venues; (2) a national market for ticket sales to fans, holding that fans participate in local markets tied to particular artists rather than a unified national market; and (3) anticompetitive effects claims in the venue-facing services market. While this ruling eliminated certain theories, it preserved core monopolization claims for trial.
Claims Set for Trial
Three categories of claims survived summary judgment. First, the court found triable issues regarding the artist-facing MCAmp market, noting that MCAmps have unique characteristics important to certain artists. If plaintiffs establish this market at trial, the jury will decide whether Live Nation acted anticompetitively by conditioning artists’ use of its amphitheaters on their agreement to use Live Nation’s promotion services.
Second, the court determined that MCVs may constitute distinct customers in the promotion market. MCVs contract with a specific tier of artists—“not too popular, but just popular enough”—who are linked to specific promoters, and they rely more heavily on concert revenue than other venues.
Third, the court found potential anticompetitive effects in the primary ticketing market, noting Live Nation’s substantial market share and exclusivity practices may foreclose half the market and prevent rivals like SeatGeek from becoming effective competitors. The court also found a triable issue regarding antitrust injury to fans who suffer downstream consequences from violations in this market.
The case thus proceeded to trial on three primary questions: (1) whether Live Nation possesses monopoly power and engaged in anticompetitive conduct in the artist-facing MCAmp market; (2) whether Live Nation possesses monopoly power in the MCV-facing promotion market; and (3) whether Live Nation engaged in anticompetitive conduct in the primary ticketing market.
Current Status
Shortly after trial began in March 2026, the DOJ reached a settlement with Live Nation. Under the agreement, Live Nation retains Ticketmaster but must open its venues to rival ticketing services, divest certain amphitheaters, and cap ticket fees at 15%. The settlement also requires Live Nation to allocate $281 million for state damages, with the total dependent on which states participate in the settlement.
However, a substantial coalition of states rejected the DOJ’s terms as insufficient and proceeded with their state law claims. Evidence presented in the first week of trial included damaging internal communications. For example (and illustrating the principle of “think before you ‘send’”), the head of ticketing for Live Nation venues was confronted with his own chat messages gems such as: “These people are so stupid,” “I almost feel bad taking advantage of them,” and “robbing them blind, baby. that’s how we do.”
The DOJ was taking the lead at trial, so the federal government’s mid-trial exodus appeared to leave the states hanging. However, when the judge refused a continuance and granted them only a short one-week reprieve to regroup, the states retained Winston Strawn to present their case. The state coalition is bent on grabbing the brass ring: They continue to seek divestiture of Ticketmaster, a remedy the federal settlement declined to pursue. Whether the state plaintiffs can coordinate their efforts and achieve antitrust enforcement without federal participation remains to be seen. Meanwhile, plaintiffs’ class action attorneys are salivating—in December 2025, federal district court Judge Wu in the Central District of California certified class claims against Ticketmaster and its parent Live Nation. Those plaintiffs are seeking 15 years of damages arising out of the alleged overpricing of over 400 million concert and venue tickets.
