AEG and Messina Touring Group Urge Judge to Reject DOJ Settlement with Live Nation, Ticketmaster
In a high‑stakes legal showdown that could reshape the U.S. concert landscape, Anschutz Entertainment Group (AEG) and touring powerhouse Louis Messina have filed a 15‑page Tunney Act objection asking U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian to reject the Justice Department’s settlement with Live Nation Entertainment and Ticketmaster.
The settlement, announced on March 9 2026, closed a federal antitrust case that began in May 2024. Although it avoided a breakup of Live Nation and Ticketmaster, the deal was rejected by 26 states and Washington, D.C., and a federal jury in April 2026 found the companies liable on the remaining state claims, including those involving primary ticketing and large amphitheaters.
AEG’s submission argues that the ticketing remedy is too narrow. The company says Ticketmaster would still control roughly 6,500 of about 7,500 annual events at major concert venues—about 85% of the market—while the open‑distribution provision would open only around 170 additional events per year to competitors. AEG contends that forcing rival platforms to connect to Ticketmaster’s back‑end infrastructure creates a “court‑sanctioned platform dependency” that preserves Ticketmaster’s dominance. The company warns that the remedy would allow Ticketmaster to retain fees, charge for integrations, and potentially gain access to commercially sensitive information.
Messina’s filing focuses on the amphitheater side of the settlement. He alleges that in 2024 Live Nation stopped returning his calls and prevented several of his artists—Old Dominion, The Lumineers and Shawn Mendes—from using Live Nation‑controlled amphitheaters. Messina says the company’s actions forced those tours to relocate, resulting in lower attendance and revenue. He also claims that Live Nation’s ticketing profits, which he calls “monopoly money,” enable the company to offer guarantees that independent promoters cannot match.
Both submissions point to the same structural problem: the integration of Live Nation’s promotion business with Ticketmaster’s ticketing platform. AEG requests that the court separate Ticketmaster from Live Nation and prohibit Ticketmaster’s long‑term exclusive agreements with major concert venues. Messina argues that the settlement’s amphitheater provisions do little to address the issue, noting that the 13 venues Live Nation would relinquish account for fewer than 200 shows in 2025 and exclude many amphitheaters needed for a viable national summer tour.
The filings also reference SeatGeek and the Progressive Policy Institute, which have made similar Tunney Act comments. SeatGeek testified that it offered venues “retaliation insurance” to compensate them if Live Nation concerts disappeared after switching ticketing providers. The Progressive Policy Institute’s comment echoes AEG’s concerns about platform dependency.
Live Nation’s executive vice‑president Dan Wall responded to the filings by saying the competitors’ submissions advance their own commercial interests and misrepresent portions of the settlement. Wall stated that the company remains confident that Judge Subramanian will approve the proposed judgment. The statement did not address Messina’s specific allegations regarding Old Dominion, The Lumineers, Shawn Mendes or Mumford & Sons.
The Tunney Act comment period closed on September 4. The Department of Justice must consider the public comments and respond before Judge Subramanian decides whether the settlement is in the public interest. The outcome will determine whether the current legal framework will continue to allow Live Nation and Ticketmaster to maintain their integrated control over the U.S. concert market.
