Ticketmaster Antitrust Verdict: Live Nation Bids to Overturn Monopoly Finding

Live Nation's Two-Pronged Legal Strategy: Rule 50(b) and Motion for New Trial

On May 21, Live Nation and Ticketmaster fired the opening salvos of their post-trial defense in the Southern District of New York, filing two motions that attack the April 15 jury verdict from every legal angle. The first motion, under Rule 50(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, asks the court to enter judgment as a matter of law for the companies on every claim — a ruling that would override the jury entirely. The second, under Rule 59, seeks a new trial if the first motion fails.

In its judgment brief, Live Nation argues that the states secured what it calls “the first-ever jury trial in a government monopolization action,” then won with “made-for-juries emotional arguments.” The states, the company says, want “nothing more for this Court to do but rubberstamp the jury verdict.”

The companies contend the verdict was swayed by improper evidence: testimony about parking and lawn-chair rental fees, European ticketing practices, and conduct that allegedly fell outside the case’s limitations period. In the new-trial brief, they argue the verdict is “against the weight of the evidence.”

The April 15 Verdict That Found an Illegal Monopoly

The April 15 jury verdict is the foundation of the DOJ’s antitrust victory in USA v. Live Nation. The jury determined that Live Nation and Ticketmaster operated an illegal monopoly over concert ticketing, a finding that has thrown the future of the long-combined company into doubt. The verdict capped a trial that the government described as a landmark challenge to consolidated power in the live entertainment industry.

Live Nation has pushed back hard, calling the verdict the product of emotion rather than law. Yet the jury’s finding remains the most significant antitrust ruling against a ticketing company in decades, and its fate now rests in the hands of U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian.

Final Reply Briefs Filed July 2: Last Arguments Before Judge Rules

On July 2, Live Nation and Ticketmaster filed their final written arguments in reply briefs — the last round of submissions before Judge Subramanian rules on the two post-trial motions. These reply briefs give the companies one final opportunity to press their case that the jury’s verdict should be set aside or, at minimum, a new trial ordered. The judge’s decision will determine whether the verdict stands, is overturned, or a new trial is granted. No hearing date has been set, but the case has now entered its decisive phase.

Key Takeaways

• Live Nation and Ticketmaster are pursuing two legal avenues: a Rule 50(b) motion for judgment as a matter of law, or a Rule 59 motion for a new trial.
• The April 15 jury verdict represents a major antitrust victory for the DOJ, finding an illegal monopoly in concert ticketing.
• Final reply briefs were filed on July 2, marking the last written arguments before Judge Arun Subramanian rules on the motions.
• The verdict has put the future of the Live Nation-Ticketmaster combination in question.
• The outcome will have significant implications for the concert ticketing industry and consumers.