NEW YORK — Beverly Hills-based Live Nation and its Ticketmaster subsidiary faced a bruising courtroom loss Wednesday after a federal jury found that the company operated a monopoly over concert venues.

The verdict by a Manhattan, N.Y., jury came after a five-week trial and caps a closely watched case that could have far reaching effects across the music industry, potentially leading to the breakup of the companies.

Ticketmaster is the world’s largest ticket seller for live events, while Live Nation is a dominant force in the concert business.

The civil case began when the federal government alleged that Live Nation used its clout to engage in a variety of anticompetitive practices, including preventing venues from using multiple ticket sellers.

“It is time to hold them accountable,” Jeffrey Kessler, an attorney for the states, said in a closing argument. He called Live Nation a “monopolistic bully” that drove up prices for ticket buyers.

Jurors agreed. They found that Ticketmaster had overcharged consumers by $1.72 for each ticket. The judge will assess damages later.

Live Nation, which owns and operates hundreds of venues, countered that it did not violate U.S. antitrust laws, arguing that artists, sports teams and venues decide prices and ticketing practices.

“Success is not against the antitrust laws in the United States,” Live Nation attorney David Marriott said in his summation.

Live Nation said in a statement that the “jury’s verdict is not the last word on this matter,” noting the court had yet to rule on a motion it had filed to challenge its liability in the case.

The trial revealed some embarrassing internal communications, including emails from a Live Nation executive who called customers “so stupid” and said the company was “robbing them blind, baby.” The executive, Benjamin Baker, testified that the messages were “very immature and unacceptable.”

The original lawsuit, led by a cadre of interested parties including the federal government, 39 states and the District of Columbia, dates to 2024. It alleged that Live Nation and Ticketmaster monopolized various aspects of the live music industry, such as concert promotion, venue operations, artist management and ticketing services.

Live Nation manages more than 400 artists and controls more than 265 venues in North America, while Ticketmaster simultaneously controls around 80% of the primary ticket marketplace and also is increasing its involvement in the resale market, according to the lawsuit.

Last month, Live Nation secured an unexpected tentative settlement with the Department of Justice in which the company agreed to several structural changes to its business, including adjustments to ticketing deals with venues, capping service fees and paying a $280-million fine.

However, more than 30 states, including California, decided to proceed with the trial. California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta praised these state-led efforts to protect consumers, even amid dwindling antitrust enforcement from the Trump administration, he said in a statement.

“This is a historic and resounding victory for artists, fans, and the venues that support them,” Bonta said. “We are incredibly proud of today’s outcome … this verdict shows just how far states can go to protect our residents from big corporations that are using their power to illegally raise prices and rip-off Americans.”

Though a verdict has been reached, remedies for how Live Nation will be held accountable for its actions are still being decided by the judge.

One possibility is that the companies could be split up, an outcome favored by critics.

National Independent Venue Assn. Executive Director Stephen Parker said Ticketmaster and Live Nation need to be separate for the industry to see change.

“Live Nation and Ticketmaster must be broken up now. Ticketmaster should not be permitted to participate in the ticket resale market. Live Nation should not be able to promote more than 50% of artists’ tours,” Parker said in a statement. “And the damages paid to the states should be remitted to the independent venues, promoters, festivals, and fans that have suffered under Live Nation’s monopolistic reign over the last 15 years.”

Serona Elton, attorney and interim vice dean at the University of Miami’s Frost School of Music, said that the separation of Live Nation and Ticket master seems to be “on the table,” but she said it’s too early to assess the verdict’s fallout on the music industry.

Elton said fans might notice small changes in pricing, but there are factors other than Live Nation that are contributing to high ticket prices, such as the secondary ticket market as well as supply and demand challenges.

The verdict, Elton said, “sends a message of support to music companies and professionals working in the live space who have felt like they have suffered financial consequences because of Live Nation’s behavior.”

The ruling is a small but necessary step toward achieving a balanced and competitive ticketing industry, said Hal Singer, a managing director of economic consulting firm Econ One, who specializes in antitrust and consumer protection issues.

Forcing a Ticketmaster sale probably is the only remedy that will bring real change, Singer said.

“We’re not out of the woods quite yet,” Singer said. “We’ve kind of tilted the probability.… It could change the competitive balance. But that requires that a meaningful remedy follows the liability. You need both.”

Fans and some artists have long groused about Ticketmaster, which was founded in 1976 and merged with Live Nation in 2010.

Dustin Brighton, director of government relations for the Coalition for Ticket Fairness, agreed that although the verdict is a landmark moment for fans, “it’s not the end of the road.”

“As the court considers remedies, the focus must be on restoring competition, increasing transparency, and ensuring fans have real choice,” Brighton said in a statement.

Times staff writer August Brown and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

President Trump has signed a bill restoring federal funding to tech startups in California and elsewhere, money that had been held up for more than six months.

The Small Business Administration money, a key source of capital for new aerospace and defense firms in the Los Angeles region, ran out in October after a congressional impasse.

The Small Business Innovation and Economic Security Act signed by Trump on Monday funds the Small Business Innovation Research, or SBIR, the Small Business Technology Transfer, or STTR, and related programs.

They provide more than $4 billion in seed funding to commercial startups that provide valuable services to the government and public, stimulate the economy and help maintain the country’s competitive edge.

The money is awarded by multiple agencies, including the Health and Human Services and Energy departments and NASA, with the military distributing the largest portion.

The funding has helped launch defense and aerospace startups across Southern California, including Costa Mesa autonomous weapons maker Anduril Industries, now valued at more than $30 billion.

Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), chair of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, held up reauthorization over concerns some startups had become reliant on the money instead of developing commercial businesses. She proposed a bill with a $75-million lifetime funding cap for individual companies.

Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts, the committee’s ranking Democrat, contended the bill would crimp innovation and hurt companies.

The reauthorization includes no lifetime caps but requires departments to set limits on how many times companies can apply each year for the Small Business Administration funding, prioritizing startups.

The bill also establishes a Strategic Breakthrough Allocation program that awards up to $30 million in Small Business Administration funding to a single company provided it can bring in matching funding.

The new program is intended to assist startups to become commercially viable after they run through their SBIR or STTR funding, which are intended to fund feasibility studies and prototypes. STTR requires a partnership with a research institution.

Other provisions in the bill include new due diligence standards to prevent any tech developed by the startups from falling into the hands of adversaries such as China.

“With a bipartisan, five-year reauthorization signed into law, small businesses are once again empowered to create these innovative technologies and tackle our nation’s most pressing challenges head-on,” Markey said in a statement.

One of Los Angeles’ most influential home builders, KB Home, is relocating its headquarters out of state, becoming the latest high-profile firm to do so.

The company, which has been based in Los Angeles since 1963 and helped build its sprawling suburbs, is moving its main office to the Phoenix metropolitan area by spring 2027, in part to reduce costs and place its employees in a more affordable housing market.

KB Home touted Arizona’s business-friendly environment as a reason for the move, but said it still plans to maintain six operating divisions in California.

The move to Arizona will help accelerate KB Home’s growth and streamline operations, Robert McGibney, president and chief executive of KB Home, said in a news release last week.

“This move brings our teams together in a more collaborative environment, and Phoenix is the right place to do it,” McGibney said.

The company has deep ties to California, with more than 100 projects and tens of thousands of homes across the state. KB Home has opened nine housing communities in Southern California in the last six months and plans to open 10 more by the end of 2026.

The company’s shares, which have been falling this year amid concern about the property market, have climbed around 1% since it made the announcement late Wednesday. They closed little changed Tuesday at $51.93.

KB Home got its start in Detroit in the 1950s and briefly shifted operations to Arizona before settling in California by 1963. The company, which gets its name from the last names of its founders, Donald Bruce Kaufman and Eli Broad, rode the boom and helped shape the growth of Southern California.

KB Home quickly emerged as one of the top builders of affordable homes in the country, starting in the post-World War II boom, when growing families across the country were leaving crowded cities for the promise of rapidly emerging suburban neighborhoods such as the San Fernando Valley in Los Angeles.

With first-time buyers as their intended customers, the company’s innovations included lowering prices by building homes on slabs, instead of digging costly basements. It pioneered providing financing for buyers and 10-year limited warranties on their homes.

Broad became one of LA.’s most influential civic leaders, using his multibillion-dollar fortune, political clout and forceful personality to spur advancements in the public sphere, particularly in the arts.

He helped guide the redevelopment of Bunker Hill in downtown Los Angeles after it was cleared for urban renewal, and it was there that he built perhaps his greatest legacy: his namesake Broad Museum, which houses the extensive private contemporary art collection that he and his wife, Edythe, accumulated.

As a downtown booster, he and then-Mayor Richard Riordan were widely credited with getting the Walt Disney Concert Hall completed in 2003, raising more than $200 million to get the stalled Frank Gehry-designed project back on track.

In the late 1970s, he became the founding chairman of the Museum of Contemporary Art, and he bailed it out of a financial scandal three decades later with a $30-million grant.

KB Home’s California exit is the latest in a corporate exodus from the state. Some companies have relocated to avoid high taxes and strict regulations that complicate doing business in the state. The move has often been done to cut costs and improve profitability.

Two other California-bred companies connected to real estate, Realtor.com and Public Storage, announced similar moves to Texas in February.

Realtor.com, a real estate services company, was drawn to the Lone Star State for its unparalleled housing growth and affordable living, according to a news release. Public Storage, the largest self-storage business in the country, announced a similar move, citing interest in Texas’ growing talent and innovation.

The Golden State has remained the fourth-largest economy in the world, even as steep taxes and stringent environmental regulations push some firms to leave. Powerful companies across business sectors have expressed discontent with the state’s business environment.

Tesla and financial services firm Charles Schwab left the San Francisco Bay Area in 2021. Elon Musk’s SpaceX and X exited the state in 2024, along with Chevron, the oil giant that was started in California.

California has also lost residents, who are fleeing high housing costs for more affordable states such as Arizona, Nevada, Oregon, Washington and Texas.

California has led the nation in net out-migration for six consecutive years, according to U-Haul data. Los Angeles County lost 54,000 residents from 2024 to 2025, partially due to continued out-migration to other states.