Live Nation’s antitrust trial is underway in the U.S. What’s at stake in the case?

Live Nation Entertainment and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) began an antitrust trial this week that could possibly force a breakup of the entertainment behemoth, which owns ticketing juggernaut Ticketmaster.

The DOJ alleges that Live Nation has an illegal monopoly that harms competition.

“Today, the concert ticket industry is broken. In fact, the concert industry itself is broken,” attorney David Dahlquist told jurors in his opening statement on Tuesday. “It is controlled by a monopolist. It is controlled by Live Nation.”

Dahlquist pointed to the company’s infamously problem-plagued effort to sell Taylor Swift tickets for the singer’s Eras Tour in 2022. He implored the Manhattan federal jury to end the company’s hold on the market.

If the government wins, it could take a wide range of actions to allow for more players to compete in the industry, including the extreme penalty of ordering a breakup of Live Nation and Ticketmaster.

Live Nation attorney David Marriott said the company faces steep competition across the industry.

“Every customer we get is a hard-fought battle in a competitive ​marketplace,” he said on Tuesday. 

But the case is only just getting started, and experts say the future impact on fans, venues and artists is still hard to predict at this stage. Here’s what we know so far, and how the trial could have ripple effects in Canada.

What’s the case about? 

The DOJ first sued Live Nation in 2024 alongside 30 U.S. states (nine more have since joined), arguing that the company used its massive size and power to enforce a self-reinforcing “flywheel” operation.

The department alleged the company made money from ticket buyers, which it used to sign artists into exclusive promotional deals. Then, using its who’s-who of performers, Live Nation signed venues into exclusive ticketing deals, starting the cycle again, the DOJ argued.

“It is time to break up Live Nation-Ticketmaster,” said then-U.S. attorney general Merrick Garland when the DOJ filed the suit.

At the time, Live Nation said it would prevail in court and added the case would not address fans’ concerns, like ticket prices and access to popular shows. It has also maintained that artists and teams set their own prices and control how tickets are sold.

Since then, the two sides have been going back and forth in the pretrial stage, during which the DOJ’s argument was narrowed down. In a hearing last month, Judge Arun Subramanian threw out some of the department’s claims of anticompetitive conduct due to a lack of evidence, such as how the company sells tickets to the public and how it books artists at major concert venues.

Stephen Selznick, partner with the Toronto-based law firm Cassels Brock & Blackwell, said it’s common for some claims to be weeded out.

But with the arguments about the consumer-facing ticketing business thrown out, the possible impact on ticket prices is limited, he says.

“You’re not going to hear about how … hockey tickets are $2,000 apiece,” Selznick said. “That’s the unfortunate part about this case.”

That means two main groups of claims are left. One is that artists have to use Live Nation’s promotional services to access some of its amphitheatre venues. Another is that the company pressures venues into exclusively using its ticketing services to access in-demand performers.

But there could still be some impact, he said. A successful DOJ could take measures to limit Live Nation’s alleged power with artists and venues, which could still lower prices, albeit to a lesser extent.

Ripple effects in Canada

Depending on how the case goes, it could have ripple effects in Canada.

If the government is successful and Live Nation’s business is limited, Selznick says the changes made in the U.S. would likely be applied to the company’s Canadian operations, as well.

He gives the example of a touring artist like Taylor Swift, who wouldn’t have separate U.S. and Canadian tours, but would view the continent as a whole, with dates in both countries managed on the same ticketing platform and by the same promoters.

“In an integrated market like that, what happens in the U.S. is going to be be very impactful on what would happen here,” Selznick said.

And regardless of the outcome, Selznick says Canada’s Competition Bureau, plus some groups that have brought cases against Live Nation in this country, will be watching closely to see what might be relevant to their own cases.

The Consumers Council of Canada has applied for permission to sue Live Nation and Ticketmaster, saying the companies have become gatekeepers to all parts of the entertainment industry and raising costs. 

Jennifer Quaid, a law professor at the University of Ottawa who used to work with the U.S. DOJ, adds that the council would still need to demonstrate that Live Nation’s practices have a specific impact in this country, however — and a lot of Canada-specific details might not necessarily come out of the American trial.

Outcome still impossible to predict

But this case is still at the very beginning, and Quaid cautions against thinking too far in the future.

While the judge has allowed the trial to go ahead, that says nothing about how strong the government’s arguments are or how likely it is to win, she said.

“We’re about to start the merit stage. That’s a big hill to climb first.”

Even if the DOJ wins its case, it doesn’t necessarily mean a company breakup. It’s one of the most extreme measures that could be imposed and usually can’t be reversed, she said. Courts have used the option sparingly in the past.

Selznick agrees. He says “behavioural remedies” — rules about how the company has to run its business to fix its anti-competitive practices — are more likely. That could mean barring Live Nation from making exclusivity agreements, for example.

Still, Keldon Bester, executive director of the Canadian Anti-Monopoly Project, is hopeful that the lawsuit could help create more competition in the entertainment industry.

“If this breaks the important levers for how Ticketmaster-Live Nation keeps costs high, then customers could see real relief.”