The antitrust lawsuit against Live Nation is set to resume after more than 30 US states refused to sign up to a settlement agreement.
In the case, the Department of Justice is accusing Ticketmaster and its parent company Live Nation of abusing their power in the live events market to create an illegal monopoly.
The suit was first filed in 2024 and it alleges that the company had used the monopoly to help stifle competition, dominate the ticketing market and gain money from fans via high prices and surcharges.
The hearing began on March 3 in Manhattan, but a week later, the two sides reportedly reached a tentative settlement agreement that would have seen Live Nation implement changes to its structure, in order to spare it from being split up from Ticketmaster.
However, according to the Associated Press, the trial will now resume on Monday (March 16) after more than 30 US states decided not to join the Justice Department in the settlement.
In fact, only seven states – Arkansas, Iowa, Mississippi, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina and South Dakota – have joined the department’s plan to settle their claims.
32 plaintiff states and the District of Columbia have instead chosen to go ahead with the trial, with Massachusetts attorney general Andrea Joy Campbell saying: “The DOJ’s settlement falls far short of protecting consumers, artists and venues from the harms that Live Nation and Ticketmaster have caused.
The suit claims that Live Nation requires artists to use its concert promotion services if they want to perform at the venues it also owns, and that it dominates ticketing services through exclusive, long-running contracts with major concert venues.
The lawyer representing Live Nation has argued that the company has never made threats, makes minimal profits, and still has to fight for every deal it makes due to the “marketplace [being] more competitive than ever it has been before.”
In the hearing earlier this month, the Justice Department claimed that Ticketmaster handled ticketing for 86 per cent of “major” venues in the US, and Live Nation dismissed the claims as “cherry picking” venues to present a skewed representation of the ticketing landscape.
Also in their case, the DOJ highlighted issues that arose for fans wanting to buy tickets to Taylor Swift’s ‘Eras’ tour in 2022, when huge numbers of customers were shut off from buying tickets.
Live Nation’s attorney shot down the claims that their “technology is held together by duct tape”, saying that the issues with the ‘Eras’ tour sale was due to bots, and that the issue was promptly resolved.
Live Nation’s CEO has previously dismissed the claims that the company makes large profits, instead claiming that music concerts are “underpriced” in his opinion.
The calls for Live Nation to create a more balanced ticketing landscape have been seen in the UK too, with the Association Of Independent Festivals (AIF) claiming that the ticketing company had exceeded “market dominance” and pushing for Live Nation and Ticketmaster to be broken up.
It alleged that while “the UK monopoly threshold is 25 per cent [and] market dominance position is 40 per cent, Live Nation control is 66.4 per cent.” In response, a rep for Live Nation told NME that the data shared wasn’t “credible and [is] likely to be misleading.”
There have been efforts made by the government to crack down on ticketing issues across the UK, too. In November, MPs announced that it will now be illegal to re-sell tickets for live music, sports, comedy and theatre events above original cost – collectively saving fans £112million per year.
Massive fees from secondary ticket sellers will also be stamped out thanks to government action, and there is a growing push for a ticket levy to be introduced – which would see smaller venues and rising talent receive a contribution from arena and stadium gigs to ensure their survival.
Pressure is on for the live music industry to ensure that half of these shows are voluntarily paying in by June 2026, or else the government will step in to make it mandatory by law.
