Live Nation is being suedby the U.S. Department of Justice over antitrust allegations, with the DOJ claiming that the company’s merger with Ticketmaster created a monopoly that stifles competition. Now, Live Nation is pushing to move the lawsuit from New York to Washington DC. The company argues that the DC federal court should hear the case because this court handled matters related to the 2010 consent decree, which allowed the Live Nation and Ticketmaster merger.
Represented by Latham & Watkins and Cravath Swaine & Moore, Live Nation and Ticketmaster insist that the DOJ’s allegations are tied to the consent decree’s effectiveness. The company denies claims of creating an illegal monopoly, calling the lawsuit baseless. They’re also trying to get parts of the case dismissed entirely. They argue that the DOJ and 16 states agreed to specific terms allowing the merger and shouldn’t be allowed to challenge it in a different venue now.
The Trial Is Set For March 2, 2026
Live Nation wants access to all discovery files for key corporate officers, including antitrust expert Dan Wall and Kimberly Tobias, Live Nation’s SVP of Litigation. The DOJ, however, has concerns about confidentiality. Despite this, Live Nation insists its in-house legal team should have full access to all case details. The DOJ counters that Live Nation’s proposed restrictions are too lenient. Judge Arun Subramanian has proposed a two-tiered access system for documents to address these concerns.
Judge Subramanian’s ruling aims to balance access while protecting confidential information about competitors. The deadline for both parties to finalize the specifics was set for July 25. If they can’t agree, the court will resolve the disputes based on their arguments.
This lawsuit adds to ongoing scrutiny of Live Nation’s market dominance, especially after the Taylor Swift ticket sales controversy. Such high-profile incidents have brought more attention to Live Nation’s practices.
Live Nation’s request to move the case is a strategic decision, believing the DC court is better suited to handle these issues. The outcome of this legal maneuver could significantly impact the case and it remains to be seen how the court will respond to this request.