One heavily publicized trial later, a jury has determined that Live Nation violated antitrust laws and, in the process, overcharged customers for tickets between May 2020 and 2024. Meanwhile, lawmakers and organizations are urging the presiding judge to split the promoter from its Ticketmaster subsidiary.

The jury decided in favor of over 30 state plaintiffs this afternoon, six weeks and change after the high-stakes trial kicked off. As we covered in detail, that stretch delivered many twists and turns – including but not limited to a DOJ-Live Nation settlement, explosive testimonies, and the public disclosure of revealing internal communications.

But in terms of relief, Live Nation made several significant concessions, among them ticketing-fee caps, a ticketing-deal split from Oak View Group, and guaranteed amphitheater access for artists regardless of whether they double as promotional-side clients, when settling with the federal government. Additionally, certain states opted against continuing to litigate, thereby accepting multimillion-dollar settlement payments from the promoter.

However, more states than that plowed ahead with the trial, which, in keeping with the initially mentioned verdict, centered on consumer harm stemming from the defendants’ alleged monopoly.

In the end, the jury determined that Live Nation/Ticketmaster had violated antitrust laws by monopolizing ticketing services and amphitheaters, besides tying venue use to promotion services. And ultimately, these actions harmed consumers by inflating prices – to the tune of an extra $1.72 per ticket, the jury found.

Now, all eyes are on the court’s approach to calculating total damages and finalizing other possible penalties. While important, the former is self-explanatory in light of the precise overcharge figure. When it comes to “other penalties,” some will recall that the plaintiffs were at the outset seeking to split Live Nation and Ticketmaster.

Especially following the DOJ settlement, evidence suggested that the outcome was unlikely. Though the same is still true – could court-ordered business-practice changes instead be in the cards? – the broader subject is worth bearing in mind.

This is partially due to the reality that today’s loss is a major setback for the company – and, given the above-highlighted federal settlement concessions as well as the large quantity of states that participated in the trial, a potentially bigger blow than a nationwide-case defeat would have proven.

Then there’s the fact that federal lawmakers are entreating Judge Arun Subramanian to review and “reject the settlement if it is not in the public interest.”

“As this court is aware,” Senators Klobuchar, Booker, Hirono, Warren, Blumenthal, and Welch wrote in a letter yesterday, “the Justice Department lawyers trying the case were not involved in the settlement discussions and were not even aware of its existence prior to its filing. The state attorneys general were also kept in the dark.

“That the settlement was hashed out without input from the lawyers trying the case demonstrates this was not a settlement struck in response to perceived litigation risk or to protect the public from harms resulting from alleged anticompetitive behavior,” they continued.

Time will tell how this seldom-seen episode – a federal-level settlement, a subsequent trial victory for a number of states, and calls to nix the settlement altogether – unfolds.

And in the bigger picture, one could argue that the case was fueled by fan and artist pushback, along with years upon years of Live Nation criticism from congressmembers and governors on both sides of the aisle. Put mildly, a PR-strategy overhaul is probably in order for the much-reviled business.

Closer to the present, Live Nation fired back against the verdict with a lengthy statement that was shared with DMN.

“The jury’s verdict is not the last word on this matter,” Live Nation wrote. “Pending motions will determine whether the liability and damages rulings stand.

“Live Nation will soon renew its motion for judgment as a matter of law, which the Court deferred until after the jury returned its verdict. That motion addresses all liability theories. The Court previously noted that Live Nation’s motion raises serious issues.

“There is also a pending motion to strike the damages testimony on which the jury’s award was based. The Court deferred ruling on that motion as well, while noting significant concerns with the damages expert’s analysis.

“Of course, Live Nation can and will appeal any unfavorable rulings on these motions.

“The jury’s award of $1.72 per ticket applies to a limited number of tickets—those sold at 257 venues, which represent about 20% of total tickets—and only to purchases by fans (excluding brokers) in certain states over the past five years. Based on that scope, we believe the aggregate single damages figure would be below $150 million, which would be trebled. In connection with the DOJ settlement, Live Nation has already accrued $280 million toward state damages and civil penalty claims.

“Injunctive relief will be determined by the Court after the states make a remedy proposal, which we expect in the coming weeks. In the meantime, the Tunney Act proceedings regarding the DOJ settlement will continue. We remain confident that the ultimate outcome of the States’ case will not be materially different than what is envisioned by the DOJ settlement,” the promoter finished.

Likewise reacting to the verdict: all manner of others, from organizations to attorneys general and many in between.

“The verdict is in!” California AG Rob Bonta said in part. “A jury today found Live Nation/Ticketmaster liable for anticompetitive conduct that harmed the music industry and included overcharging consumers. This is a historic and resounding victory for artists, fans, and the venues that support them.”

Next, Dustin Brighton, the Coalition for Ticket Fairness’ government relations director, touted the result as “a landmark moment for fans.”

“This decision is a landmark moment for fans,” Brighton stated. “A federal jury made clear what millions have experienced for years: Live Nation and Ticketmaster built a monopoly to eliminate competition from small businesses and artificially inflate prices as part of a scheme to enrich their corporate executives.

“This ruling is an important milestone, but it’s not the end of the road. As the court considers remedies, the focus must be on restoring competition, increasing transparency, and ensuring fans have real choice,” he continued in part.

And John Breyault, the National Consumers League’s VP of public policy, telecommunications, and fraud, urged policymakers “to break up this stranglehold.”

“Today’s verdict confirms what millions of fans already knew: Live Nation and Ticketmaster used their dominance to build and protect an illegal monopoly at the direct expense of consumers,” indicated Breyault.

“For years, concertgoers have been stuck paying inflated prices and excessive fees in a marketplace where competition was pushed aside. This ruling must be a turning point—and policymakers should move quickly to break up this stranglehold and restore real competition, transparency, and fair prices for fans,” he concluded.

Additionally, the National Independent Venue Association (NIVA) in a release urged “severe” consequences for Live Nation in the wake of the verdict.

“Live Nation and Ticketmaster must be broken up now,” NIVA executive director Stephen Parker elaborated. “Ticketmaster should not be permitted to participate in the ticket resale market. Live Nation should not be able to promote more than 50% of artists’ tours. And the damages paid to the states should be remitted to the independent venues, promoters, festivals, and fans that have suffered under Live Nation’s monopolistic reign over the last 15 years.”

Time-zone considerations aside, even international Ticketmaster competitors like Berlin-based resale platform Ticombo reached out to DMN.

“Transparency in ticketing is not only about displaying the final price, but also about making sure the ticket details and full cost structure are clear and easy for fans to understand. In high-demand events, trust depends on consistency, clarity, and a straightforward purchase experience from the very beginning,” added Ticombo COO Peter Savovsky.

‍