State attorneys restarted the federal antitrust trial against Live Nation–Ticketmaster Monday, picking up testimony about how the concert giant deployed a “velvet hammer” against rivals after a chaotic week in which the Justice Department settled its claims mid-trial.
The states had originally sought a mistrial, citing fears of jury prejudice and doubts about their ability to take over the case on short notice. Judge Arun Subramanian appeared unlikely to grant it. Once the states secured access to the DOJ’s expert witness and assembled a new legal team, they withdrew the motion.
Subramanian welcomed jurors back from what he called their “spring break” and asked whether any had encountered news coverage of the case — forbidden under jury instructions. They either shook their heads or said nothing. He told them the federal government and several states had resolved their claims, and that jurors should draw no inferences from those parties’ absence.
New lawyers, familiar allegations
The replacement team is co-led by Jonathan Hatch of the New York AG’s office and Jeffrey Kessler of Winston & Strawn, who previously represented college athletes in the Supreme Court antitrust case against the NCAA over athlete compensation.
The new attorneys resumed questioning of Jay Marciano, COO of AEG, a direct competitor to Live Nation. Marciano described ticketing practices in Europe, where venues frequently use multiple ticketing services — a contrast to the US norm of exclusive contracts, typically awarded to Ticketmaster.
On cross-examination, Marciano addressed an incident from early in the trial: a call in which Live Nation CEO Michael Rapino responded to Barclays Center’s attempt to drop Ticketmaster by noting the new UBS Arena nearby would make it harder for Barclays to attract concerts. The arena interpreted the comment as a threat. Marciano said it is standard practice for concert promoters to play venues against each other for better terms, and that a newer venue like UBS Arena would naturally draw artists away regardless.
Amphitheater control at the center of the case
Separately, Live Nation‘s president of US concerts, Robert Roux, faced questions about the company’s grip on large outdoor venues. Through the company’s own business presentations, plaintiff attorney Josh Hafenbrack showed the firm controlled four of the top five US amphitheaters by ticket sales, up from a position it had been building since at least 2016.
A 2018 internal presentation listed the top 100 amphitheaters worldwide, with 62 highlighted in green — venues Live Nation owned, operated, or exclusively booked at that time. Roux confirmed the company has added more from that list since.
A 2015 email from Roux, shown in court, stated that many non-superstar artists specifically seek out amphitheaters when planning tours — venues that, according to evidence presented at trial, are largely under Live Nation’s control.
The company denies acting anticompetitively, according to the announcement, and argues the states’ case ignores other venue types that compete for the same bookings.
This article is a curated summary based on third-party sources. Source: Read the original article
