The antitrust trial of Live Nation and Ticketmaster resumed Monday in a New York federal court with three dozen states remaining in the case a week after the Justice Department settled its claims and withdrew. What might have ended the case entirely instead became a turning point: prosecutors exiting, leaving 36 states and the District of Columbia to take the lead.
The abrupt shift exposed a fundamental disagreement about what counts as victory in antitrust enforcement. The Justice Department said last week that it settled its case after winning concessions from Live Nation that would open up some ticketing to rival ticketing companies and ultimately lower prices for consumers. Among the concessions: the company would no longer have exclusive booking agreements with 13 of the amphitheaters it operates across the U.S., and would cap fees on amphitheaters at 15 percent, as well as open up some of Ticketmaster's tech other platforms.
Many state attorneys general saw this differently. Numerous states criticized the deal, saying the federal government failed to get enough concessions from the company. The federal settlement stopped short of the original goal: breaking up the combined entity. From the prosecution side, that represented a significant retreat. For the states, it was unfinished business.
The week of uncertainty that followed tested everyone's resolve. The states requested a mistrial after U.S. government lawyers said they'd reached a tentative settlement. After the judge urged the states to negotiate for several days with attorneys for Live Nation, the states withdrew their mistrial request and Subramanian said the trial would resume Monday. Only a handful of states ultimately followed the federal government's path. After no jurors raised hands, he told them Arkansas, Nebraska and South Dakota had settled claims and were no longer part of the case.
The core dispute between the opposing sides remains stark. As the trial resumed, 36 states and the District of Columbia continued to press claims that Live Nation Entertainment and its ticketing subsidiary, Ticketmaster, are blocking competition and driving up prices for fans. They say this was done through threats, retaliation and other tactics to control virtually every aspect of the industry, from concert promotion to ticketing.
Live Nation's defence hinges on a different view of industry structure. Lawyers for Live Nation and Ticketmaster have tried to show jurors that the entertainment and ticketing business is more complicated than the states are portraying it and that it's impossible to monopolize an industry that is largely controlled by artists, sports teams and venues that set prices and decide how tickets are sold. During testimony, Marciano said his company has trouble overcoming exclusive contracts used by Live Nation Entertainment and Ticketmaster to dominate the industry in the U.S. but Live Nation executives have disputed the claim that they leverage power unfairly.
The continuing trial represents a significant institutional choice: states asserting their right to pursue cases federal prosecutors have abandoned. Whether that decision vindicates state-level enforcement or prolongs a contest already settled remains uncertain. The jury will hear weeks of testimony before reaching its own conclusion about whether market dominance has crossed the line into illegal conduct.