United States of America et al v. Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. et al

Track this case

Case overview

Case Number:

1:24-cv-03973

Court:

New York Southern

Nature of Suit:

Anti-Trust

Judge:

Arun Subramanian

Firms

Companies

Government Agencies

Sectors & Industries:

  1. March 26, 2026

    Live Nation Kicks Off Defense Case In Antitrust Trial

    A coalition of state attorneys general on Thursday mostly concluded their antitrust case against Live Nation and its Ticketmaster subsidiary, following weeks of a trial that was nearly derailed after the U.S. Department of Justice dropped out, and Live Nation kicked off its defense case with a company executive who pushed back against claims of anticompetitive conduct.

  2. March 25, 2026

    Oak View Exec Tells Jury Of Deal To Hype Ticketmaster

    The CEO of Oak View Group told a Manhattan federal jury Wednesday that his company didn't inform other venue owners that it was being paid to "advocate" for them to use Ticketmaster as a vendor for ticketing services, but said he still would recommend the Live Nation subsidiary anyway since it's the best in the business.

  3. March 19, 2026

    Live Nation CEO Says He Can't Recall 'Market Power' Remark

    Live Nation's longtime CEO sparred Thursday with states that say the $36 billion entertainment giant engages in monopolization, telling a Manhattan federal jury the business is a "better mousetrap" than rivals and saying he couldn't recall telling investors the company has "incredible market power."  

  4. March 16, 2026

    Live Nation Trial Resumes, Exec Says Competition Is Up

    The antitrust trial of Live Nation picked back up Monday after a weeklong hiatus with a coalition of states in the driver's seat, after the U.S. Department of Justice settled its case against the live entertainment giant, with one of its executives testifying that competition in the concert promotion business has grown in recent years.

  5. March 13, 2026

    States To Head Live Nation Antitrust Trial After Feds Settle

    Over two dozen states and the District of Columbia are forging ahead with monopolization claims against Live Nation in Manhattan federal court after the federal government unexpectedly agreed to settle with the live entertainment giant after a week of trial.

  6. March 10, 2026

    Judge Fumes As Live Nation Antitrust Trial Remains In Limbo

    The status of Live Nation Entertainment's antitrust trial and proposed settlement over federal and state government claims of anticompetitive conduct remained up in the air Tuesday amid pushback by several states, while the Manhattan federal judge overseeing the case upbraided the parties for keeping him out of the loop about negotiations.

  7. March 09, 2026

    DOJ Official Calls Live Nation Deal Win-Win As AGs Press On

    The Justice Department's midtrial settlement with Live Nation on Monday created an instant rift with more than two dozen state attorneys general who vowed to press forward instead of accepting a deal that requires online ticketing technology to be open-sourced and forces the company to divest control over at least 13 amphitheaters.

  8. March 09, 2026

    DOJ Deal With Live Nation Throws Antitrust Trial Into Disarray

    U.S. Department of Justice lawyers told a Manhattan federal judge Monday that the government is settling its claims that Live Nation engaged in unlawful monopolization by tying ticket sales to the use of its venues, throwing an ongoing trial involving dozens of states into an uncertain posture.

  9. March 03, 2026

    Live Nation Tells Jury It's A 'Fierce' But Legal Competitor

    Live Nation does not illegally pressure concert venues or artists to use Ticketmaster and its other services, its counsel told a Manhattan federal jury Tuesday, calling the entertainment giant a "fierce, lawful, legitimate" competitor as a closely watched antitrust trial opened.

  10. February 25, 2026

    Dems Demand Explanation For DOJ Antitrust Chief's Exit

    Two Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee demanded Wednesday that U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi explain to lawmakers why the U.S. Department of Justice's antitrust chief was forced to resign, expressing concern about the administration's potential interference with merger reviews and antitrust litigation.