The U.S. Justice Department has taken its fight with Live Nation to court, accusing the concert giant of using monopoly power to dominate the live music ecosystem and extract excessive fees from fans.
Opening arguments began Tuesday in federal court in Manhattan, where government attorneys laid out a sweeping case against the company that owns Ticketmaster.
“We are here because they misuse their market power,” said David E. Dahlquist, a lawyer in the Justice Department’s antitrust division. “They earn their profits through illegal action.”
At the center of the case is the government’s claim that Live Nation maintains control of the industry through leverage across multiple parts of the concert business. Prosecutors argue the company pressures artists to use Live Nation promotion services if they want access to its amphitheaters. Venues, they say, are pushed toward Ticketmaster ticketing deals out of fear of losing access to tours controlled by the company.
The Justice Department ultimately wants the court to unwind the 2010 merger between Live Nation and Ticketmaster. Regulators approved that deal at the time, but now argue it created a company with outsized influence over the entire live entertainment market.
“This case is about power,” Dahlquist told jurors. “The power of a monopolist to control competition.”
Live Nation strongly disputes that narrative.
Attorneys for the company argued that while Live Nation is the largest player in live music, that alone does not make it a monopoly. Defense lawyer David R. Marriott said the company operates on slim margins, competes aggressively for venue and artist deals, and does not rely on threats or coercion.
“This marketplace is more competitive than ever it has been before,” Marriott told the jury.
According to Live Nation, the government’s case overlooks the power held by the other major players in the business. The company argues its real negotiating partners are superstar artists and large entertainment corporations that operate venues.
“Live Nation and Ticketmaster are all about bringing joy to people’s lives,” Marriott said. “And doing it lawfully and doing it legitimately.”
Even if the government ultimately wins the case, the outcome is not guaranteed to be a breakup. The judge overseeing the trial, Arun Subramanian, recently narrowed several aspects of the government’s complaint before the trial began.
Some claims about Live Nation’s behavior around ticket sales and touring at large venues were dismissed. However, the government is still pursuing claims related to ticketing deals with arenas and amphitheaters.
Prosecutors say Ticketmaster currently handles ticketing for roughly 86 percent of those venues.
“This is not healthy competition,” Dahlquist said.
Live Nation disputes that statistic and the way the market is defined. Marriott argued the government is selectively choosing venues that support its narrative. When a broader set of venues and events are included, he said Ticketmaster’s market share is closer to 40 percent.
Another flashpoint in the trial was the chaotic 2022 presale for Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour, when Ticketmaster’s systems buckled under massive demand.
Millions of fans attempted to buy tickets during the presale, triggering widespread delays and outages that reignited criticism of Ticketmaster’s dominance.
Justice Department attorneys pointed to the incident as evidence that Live Nation has little competitive pressure to improve its systems.
“Their technology is held together by duct tape,” Dahlquist told jurors. “They have prioritized growth over maintaining their systems.”
Live Nation acknowledged the breakdown but attributed it to unprecedented demand and cyberattacks during what it described as the largest ticket on-sale in history.
“There’s no question there was a problem,” Marriott said. But he added that no other ticketing platform would have handled the surge any better.
The trial is expected to run for at least a month. After both sides present their witnesses and evidence, the jury will decide whether Live Nation violated antitrust law.
If the government prevails, the judge could order structural changes to the company, including separating Live Nation’s touring operations from Ticketmaster. Other remedies could include restrictions on certain business practices.
For an industry that has spent years debating ticket fees, venue access, and artist leverage, the outcome could reshape the economics of live music.
