Attorneys for Live Nation are urging the dismissal of the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) antitrust allegations against the concert promoter. They argue that the company’s use of its amphitheaters does not constitute illegal tying arrangements, asserting that Live Nation has no obligation to allow rival promoters to use the venues it owns or manages.
In a letter dated July 17 to Judge Arun Subramanian, Live Nation’s co-lead trial counsel Alfred C. Pfeiffer of Latham & Watkins argued that the practice, described as a “refusal to deal,” is common in the concert industry and is protected by Supreme Court precedent.
Pfeiffer referenced a 2004 ruling in a case brought by Verizon, stating, “As a general matter, the Sherman Act does not restrict the long recognized right of a [defendant] engaged in an entirely private business, freely to exercise his own independent discretion as to parties with whom he will deal.” He emphasized that Live Nation has no obligation “to extend a helping hand to new entrants” or assist its rivals “survive or expand.” He added that “the unimpeachable freedom to refuse to deal with rivals (in all but the rarest circumstances, which are not even arguably present in this case) rests on bedrock antitrust principles.”
Related: Live Nation May Face Antitrust Lawsuit
The DOJ’s 128-page complaint against Live Nation alleges that the company illegally “conditions artists’ access” to the 56 outdoor amphitheaters it controls by forcing artists to choose “Live Nation as the promoter for concerts at its venues.” This forms the crux of the government’s case against the concert giant.
Pfeiffer’s letter follows a June 27 pre-trial hearing where Judge Subramanian invited Live Nation’s attorneys to file a letter identifying issues with the DOJ complaint before an amended complaint is filed. Pfeiffer noted that the judge’s invitation was intended to provide the defendants “a good argument that those claims should be dismissed with prejudice” if the government fails to counter Live Nation’s arguments in a motion to dismiss.
Source: Billboard
Featured News
Big Tech Braces for Potential Changes Under a Second Trump Presidency
Nov 6, 2024 by
CPI
Trump’s Potential Shift in US Antitrust Policy Raises Questions for Big Tech and Mergers
Nov 6, 2024 by
CPI
EU Set to Fine Apple in First Major Enforcement of Digital Markets Act
Nov 5, 2024 by
CPI
Six Indicted in Federal Bid-Rigging Schemes Involving Government IT Contracts
Nov 5, 2024 by
CPI
Ireland Secures First €3 Billion Apple Tax Payment, Boosting Exchequer Funds
Nov 5, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Remedies Revisited
Oct 30, 2024 by
CPI
Fixing the Fix: Updating Policy on Merger Remedies
Oct 30, 2024 by
CPI
Methodology Matters: The 2017 FTC Remedies Study
Oct 30, 2024 by
CPI
U.S. v. AT&T: Five Lessons for Vertical Merger Enforcement
Oct 30, 2024 by
CPI
The Search for Antitrust Remedies in Tech Leads Beyond Antitrust
Oct 30, 2024 by
CPI