Two of Live Nation's biggest rivals are urging a federal judge to throw out a settlement between the Department of Justice and the live entertainment giant, arguing that the deal does nothing to fix the underlying problem.
AEG and SeatGeek both filed public comments this week criticizing the DOJ's proposed resolution, which would allow Live Nation to keep ownership of Ticketmaster while adding new antitrust guardrails. The comments were reported by Billboard.
The settlement came after a blockbuster antitrust trial this spring. The DOJ reached its deal with Live Nation about a week into the proceedings. State attorneys general continued with the trial, and a jury ultimately found Live Nation liable for monopolizing the live music industry through its control of artist promotion, venue ownership, and ticketing. Live Nation has denied those claims and said it plans to appeal.
Judge Arun Subramanian now must decide between two paths. He can accept the DOJ settlement and its new business restrictions, or he can order the breakup of Live Nation and Ticketmaster, a far rarer and more drastic remedy. The states in the case are pushing for a total breakup. So is AEG.
AEG's public comment, docketed on Thursday, laid out its position plainly. "The bottom line is simple: as long as Ticketmaster remains vertically integrated with Live Nation, venues will continue to face pressure to choose Ticketmaster because of Live Nation's control over content," the comment reads. "The proposed decree does not address that fundamental incentive structure. Divestiture is needed to restore competition."
SeatGeek stopped short of explicitly calling for divestiture, but argued in its own comment that the settlement falls far short of fixing what it describes as Live Nation's market dominance.
One central dispute in the case involves exclusive primary ticketing agreements. Live Nation has been accused of pressuring venues to sign with Ticketmaster and retaliating against those that chose competitors. The DOJ settlement would require Ticketmaster to offer non-exclusive contracts and bar Live Nation from withholding concerts as punishment for venues that switch ticketing providers.
AEG and SeatGeek both argue that those promises are not credible. They point to two prior moments when Live Nation made similar commitments to the DOJ, once when it merged with Ticketmaster in 2010 and again in a 2020 follow-up agreement that added compliance requirements. According to both companies, Live Nation did not meaningfully change its behavior after either of those deals.
Executives from both AEG and SeatGeek testified against Live Nation during the trial. Judge Subramanian has not yet indicated when he will rule.
