The lawsuit argued that Live Nation had violated state and federal law by deliberately acquiring monopoly control of the market, but the judge disagreed. "Quite simply, plaintiffs in this case have failed to produce or cite evidence that Live Nation's conduct violates the antitrust laws," U.S. District Judge J. Frederick Motz wrote in his opinion.
Motz conceded that "Live Nation is undisputedly large, and utilizes its size and global reach to sign artists to exclusive contracts and steer them to perform in venues that it owns" but that this did not constitute a monopoly.
"This claim must necessarily fail because I have concluded that Live Nation has not engaged in anticompetitive acts, either through illegal tying arrangements, a refusal to deal, or exclusive dealing," Mott wrote.
In a statement following the ruling, a spokesperson for Live Nation said: "We are very pleased with the judge's ruling, which we believe validates Live Nation's business approach and practices, and which aligns with our long-standing belief that the accusations made in this case were completely false. We feel vindicated that the court was able to see through the baseless allegations by a rival promoter and recognize that the claims of anti-competitive conduct had no merit. Our focus is, and will continue to be, providing a world-class live music experience for artists and their millions of fans."
Hurwitz released a statement of his own to Baltimore's City Paper:
– via CelebrityAccess
Related articles


