Connect with us

News

US to seek break-up of Live Nation in lawsuit

Published

on

US to seek break-up of Live Nation in lawsuit

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

US federal prosecutors are set to seek to break up Live Nation Entertainment in a lawsuit alleging that Ticketmaster’s dominance in ticketing violates antitrust law, according to a person familiar with the matter.

The Department of Justice alongside a group of states could file a case as early as Thursday, the person said. It will pursue remedies including splitting Live Nation Entertainment, which was created by the 2010 merger of Live Nation and Ticketmaster.

The company has had a long-standing legal stand-off with the DoJ, and it has faced growing pushback from fans, lawmakers, artists and competitors who accuse it of having too much power over the live entertainment industry.

Advertisement

The issue has drawn more attention in the past few years as prices have soared and musicians began touring again after a pandemic-induced hiatus. The average US concert ticket price rose to nearly $131 in 2023, up 23 per cent from the prior year, according to Pollstar.

The DoJ declined to comment. Live Nation did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The company’s shares dropped more than 6 per cent in after-hours trading.

The justice department in 2010 gave the green light to the merger of Ticketmaster and Live Nation subject to a 10-year settlement agreement that forced Ticketmaster to license a copy of its ticketing software to rival Anschutz Entertainment Group and divest ticketing assets. The DoJ also barred it from retaliating against venues that choose alternative ticketing or promotional services.

In 2019, the DoJ modified and extended the agreement, saying the group had “repeatedly” violated the initial deal. Prosecutors added new provisions including specifying that the retaliation ban would apply to venues that host “one or more” live events, not just “all Live Nation content”. But they also added that the group could bundle products and services “in any combination”.

The lawsuit would mark the DoJ’s latest antitrust broadside against corporate America. Jonathan Kanter, head of the department’s antitrust unit, has adopted a tougher enforcement stance in a bid to tackle anti-competitive conduct he argues has proliferated in recent decades due to lax policy.

Advertisement

On an earnings call earlier this month, Live Nation Entertainment’s chief financial officer Joe Berchtold said the DoJ’s investigation “appears to be focused on specific business practices, not the legality of Live Nation/Ticketmaster merger or our overall business structure”. 

“Based on the issues we know about, we don’t believe a break-up of Live Nation and Ticketmaster would be a legally permissible remedy”, Berchtold added.

Frustration against Ticketmaster was exacerbated by its fiasco in 2022 during the sale of tickets for Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour, when buyers were left waiting for hours as its website was overwhelmed by massive demand. Ticketmaster cancelled a subsequent ticket sale due to “insufficient remaining ticket inventory”.

Lawmakers across parties railed against Ticketmaster after the Swift debacle, calling Live Nation Entertainment to testify before Congress shortly thereafter alongside artists and competitors.

Bloomberg first reported news of the lawsuit.

Advertisement

News

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

Published

on

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

The Supreme Court

Win McNamee/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Win McNamee/Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Monday intervened in New York’s redistricting process, blocking a lower court decision that would likely have flipped a Republican congressional district into a Democratic district.    
  
At issue is the midterm redrawing of New York’s 11th congressional district, including Staten Island and a small part of Brooklyn. The district is currently held by a Republican, but on Jan. 21, a state Supreme Court judge ruled that the current district dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the state constitution.  
  
GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional “racial gerrymander.” New York’s congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot.  
  
As in this year’s prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans.   
 
Voters and the State of New York contended it’s too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York’s highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now “future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court” and “be rewarded for such gamesmanship.” The state argues this is an issue for “New York courts, not federal courts” to resolve, and there is sufficient time for the dispute to be resolved on the merits. 
  
The court majority explained the decision to intervene in 101 words, which the three dissenting liberal justices  summarized as “Rules for thee, but not for me.” 
 
The unsigned majority order does not explain the Court’s rationale. It says only how long the stay will last, until the case moves through the New York State appeals courts. If, however, the losing party petitions and the court agrees to hear the challenge, the stay extends until the final opinion is announced. 
 
Dissenting from the decision were Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Writing for the three, Sotomayor  said that  if nonfinal decisions of a state trial court can be brought to highest court, “then every decision from any court is now fair game.” More immediately, she noted, “By granting these applications, the Court thrusts itself into the middle of every election-law dispute around the country, even as many States redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election.” 

Monday’s Supreme Court action deviates from the court’s hands-off pattern in these mid-term redistricting fights this year. In two previous cases — from Texas and California — the court refused to intervene, allowing newly drawn maps to stay in effect.  
  
Requests for Supreme Court intervention on redistricting issues has been a recurring theme this term, a trend that is likely to grow.  Earlier last month  the high court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map.  California’s redistricting came in response to a GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas that the Supreme Court also permitted to move forward. These redistricting efforts are expected to offset one another.     
   
But the high court itself has yet to rule on a challenge to Louisiana’s voting map, which was drawn by the state legislature after the decennial census in order to create a second majority-Black district.  Since the drawing of that second majority-black district, the state has backed away from that map, hoping to return to a plan that provides for only one majority-minority district.    
     
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Louisiana case has stretched across two terms. The justices failed to resolve the case last term and chose to order a second round of arguments this term adding a new question: Does the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority district violate the constitution’s Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments’ guarantee of the right to vote and the authority of Congress to enforce that mandate?    
Following the addition of the new question, the state of Louisiana flipped positions to oppose the map it had just drawn and defended in court. Whether the Supreme Court follows suit remains to be seen. But the tone of the October argument suggested that the court’s conservative supermajority is likely to continue undercutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act.   

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Published

on

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown.  All times on the map are Pacific time. The New York Times

A minor earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 3.5 struck in Central California on Monday, according to the United States Geological Survey.

The temblor happened at 7:17 a.m. Pacific time about 6 miles northwest of Pinnacles, Calif., data from the agency shows.

As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.

Source: United States Geological Survey | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Monday, March 2 at 10:20 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Monday, March 2 at 11:18 a.m. Eastern.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets

Published

on

US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets

The U.S. and Israel have been conducting strikes against targets in Iran since Saturday morning, with the aim of toppling Tehran’s clerical regime. Iran has fired back, with retaliatory assaults featuring missiles and drones targeting several Gulf countries and American bases in the Middle East.

“All six aircrew ejected safely, have been safely recovered, and are in stable condition. Kuwait has acknowledged this incident, and we are grateful for the efforts of the Kuwaiti defense forces and their support in this ongoing operation,” Central Command said.

“The cause of the incident is under investigation. Additional information will be released as it becomes available,” it added.

In a separate statement later Monday, Central Command said that American forces had been killed during combat since the strikes began.

“As of 7:30 am ET, March 2, four U.S. service members have been killed in action. The fourth service member, who was seriously wounded during Iran’s initial attacks, eventually succumbed to their injuries,” it said.

Advertisement

Major combat operations continue and our response effort is ongoing. The identities of the fallen are being withheld until 24 hours after next of kin notification,” Central Command added.

This story has been updated.

Continue Reading

Trending