Utah Joins Justice Department Lawsuit Against Ticketmaster, Live Nation

SALT LAKE CITY — Utah recently joined the Justice Department’s lawsuit against Ticketmaster, continuing the antitrust work of the state Attorney General’s Office. The state was successful in pursuing a Google Play Store antitrust lawsuit and is now pursuing another antitrust case against Ticketmaster.

Most states have joined the lawsuit at this point, which accuses Ticketmaster and its parent company Live Nation of acting as “gatekeepers for virtually all live music in America today.” An amended lawsuit with Utah as plaintiff was filed Aug. 19.

The complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Live Nation said on its website that it “does not in any way fit the profile” of a monopoly, and that rising ticket prices are due to factors such as an artist’s popularity, ticket resales and rising production costs.

The company said it supports reforms that will help fans purchase tickets at the price set by artists, adding that it has made that clear to Congress and the Justice Department.

“Instead, it brought a case that misleads the public by suggesting that ticket prices would be lower if something were done with Live Nation and Ticketmaster,” the company said. “The DOJ is not helping consumers with their real concerns.”

Justice Department officials said the lawsuit was filed because of Live Nation’s alleged illegal monopoly.

“We allege that Live Nation relies on unlawful, anticompetitive conduct to exert monopolistic control over the live events industry in the United States at the expense of fans, artists, smaller promoters and venue operators,” U.S. Attorney General Merrick B. Garland said in a statement. “As a result, fans are paying more in fees, artists are having fewer opportunities to play shows, smaller promoters are being squeezed out, and venues are having fewer viable ticketing options. It is time to separate Live Nation-Ticketmaster.”

The lawsuit alleges that Live Nation controls approximately 80% or more of the major concert ticketing markets and accuses the company of anticompetitive practices.

“Because Live Nation and Ticketmaster control such a large portion of the concert experience, potential rivals must compete at scale across multiple tiers of the concert ecosystem, further raising the barriers to competition and requiring multi-tiered entry by current and potential competitors,” the lawsuit alleged.

As evidence of the effects of Live Nation’s alleged monopoly and anticompetitive behavior, the lawsuit pointed to fees concertgoers must pay, calling them the “Ticketmaster Tax.” In addition to the fees, the lawsuit said, because of the lack of competition, Ticketmaster “does not have to invest as much to improve the fan experience.”

“Live Nation’s monopoly and the anticompetitive conduct that protects and maintains that monopoly strike a chord precisely because the industry at stake is one that has inspired, entertained, and challenged Americans for generations,” the lawsuit says. “This anticompetitive conduct not only harms the fabric of the live music industry and the countless people who work in it, but also destroys the foundations of creative expression and the arts that underpin our personal, social, and political lives.”

The lawsuit accuses Live Nation of engaging in anti-competitive practices by intimidating venues into doing business with rivals, locking venues into long-term, exclusive contracts and limiting artists’ access to venues.

“The live music industry in America is fractured because Live Nation-Ticketmaster has an illegal monopoly,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Jonathan Kanter of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division said in a statement. “Our antitrust lawsuit seeks to break the Live Nation-Ticketmaster monopoly and restore competition for the good of fans and artists.”

Live Nation’s response to lawsuit

Live Nation published an article on its website responding to the allegations raised in the lawsuit.

“It ignores everything that actually drives higher ticket prices, from rising production costs to artist popularity to the 24/7 online ticketing market that shows audiences are willing to pay significantly more than the original ticket prices,” wrote Dan Wall, vice president of corporate and regulatory affairs at Live Nation.

As for service fees, Wall said the lawsuit “ignores the fact that Ticketmaster only retains a modest portion of those fees.”

“One of the most stunning parts of today’s complaint is the claim that there are ‘barriers to entry’ because ‘artists naturally prefer to work with a promoter who has a track record of success in promoting a high volume of popular concerts in popular venues’ — namely Live Nation,” Wall said. “That’s the ultimate expression of competition on the merits, of winning by being better. But to this group, it’s anti-competitive.”