A jury has found that concert giant Live Nation and its Ticketmaster subsidiary had a harmful monopoly over big concert venues, dealing the company a loss in a lawsuit over claims brought by dozens of U.S. states and the District of Columbia. NEW YORK (AP) — A jury found Wednesday that entertainment giant Live Nation, which hosts tens of thousands of concerts a year, and its Ticketmaster subsidiary had a harmful monopoly over big venues.
Main Idea: A New York jury found that Live Nation and Ticketmaster held a harmful monopoly over big concert venues, which could lead to major penalties.
Key Points:
Live Nation and Ticketmaster could keep facing higher costs, fines, and forced sales, which may not lower ticket prices soon and could disrupt some venues.
The verdict may help consumers over time by pushing more competition in ticket sales and possibly reducing fees and prices.
Rate how each entity in this article affected the American people.
Primary subsidiary at the center of the monopoly case and alleged anticompetitive practices.
The deciding body whose verdict is the core event of the article.
Primary company in the antitrust verdict; the article centers on its monopoly finding and potential penalties.
Named state official who reacted to and praised the verdict as a major victory.
Live Nation CEO who testified and is a central executive voice in the case.
Lead attorney for the states, central to the litigation and post-verdict comments.
Central government actor that initially led the civil case against Live Nation.
Comments here are the same thread shown when this article appears in The Pulse.
No comments on this article yet.
Sign in to commentNamed official quoted responding to the verdict, but her role is secondary.
Company lawyer who argued Live Nation’s defense at trial.
One of the states that sued and commented on the verdict, but not the main focus.
Included as a co-plaintiff jurisdiction in the lawsuit, but only mentioned as part of the group of suing.