{"id":7261,"date":"2025-08-06T03:53:17","date_gmt":"2025-08-06T03:53:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/what-it-means-for-the-live-nation-ticketmaster-case\/"},"modified":"2025-08-06T03:53:17","modified_gmt":"2025-08-06T03:53:17","slug":"what-it-means-for-the-live-nation-ticketmaster-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/what-it-means-for-the-live-nation-ticketmaster-case\/","title":{"rendered":"What It Means for the Live Nation-Ticketmaster Case"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n

\n\tL<\/span>ast month, venue manager and developer Oak View Group (OVG) signed a $15 million non-prosecution agreement that allows the live entertainment giant to avoid liability for then-CEO Tim Leiweke<\/strong>\u2019s alleged plot to rig bids for Austin\u2019s Moody Center Arena. <\/p>\n

\n\tIn the agreement, OVG promised the Department of Justice (DOJ) that it will cooperate in Leiweke\u2019s criminal case, and it agreed to a set of facts about the alleged scheme. But there\u2019s another, more unusual feature to the deal: OVG also stipulated in a two-page statement of facts that its venue management division, OVG360, steered clients to Ticketmaster in exchange for more than $20 million in undisclosed fees from the live ticketing giant. <\/p>\n

\n

\n

\t\t\t\t\tRelated\t\t<\/p>\n<\/h3>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n\tOVG did not disclose the incentive payment arrangement to its clients \u2014 which, according to the statement of facts, ran afoul of the company\u2019s fiduciary duties. Though the arrangement is not illegal, secret rebate schemes between venue managers and ticketing companies have long been criticized as anti-competitive in the heavily consolidated live music industry. <\/p>\n

\n\tWhile the Ticketmaster admission won\u2019t have any impact on Leiweke\u2019s indictment, it could play a part in the DOJ\u2019s civil antitrust lawsuit against the company and its parent, Live Nation. Filed in 2024, the lawsuit seeks to undo Ticketmaster and Live Nation\u2019s 2010 merger, accusing company officials of using power and money to ensure their long-term dominance in ticketing and concert promotion. OVG is not a defendant in that case, but its name is scattered throughout the complaint with claims that the company acted as Ticketmaster\u2019s \u201cpimp,\u201d \u201chammer\u201d and \u201cprotector\u201d to keep venues using its services. <\/p>\n

\n\tSources at OVG tell Billboard<\/em> that the company\u2019s lawyers insisted the Ticketmaster language be added to the non-prosecution agreement as a layer of protection from future criminal liability. <\/p>\n

\n\tMultiple attorneys with experience negotiating criminal resolutions with the DOJ say it\u2019s common for companies to request this type of so-called \u201cglobal settlement\u201d to avoid the risk of future legal headaches. <\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cIf the company [OVG] thought it had exposure in the Live Nation case, it\u2019s clear why it would want a global resolution,\u201d <\/strong>says Alexis Loeb<\/strong>, a former prosecutor in the DOJ Antitrust Division who now practices at the firm Farella Braun + Mart. <\/p>\n

\n

\n

\t\t\t\t\tRelated\t\t<\/p>\n<\/h3>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

\t\t\t\t\t\t\"From<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n\tSo, if this Ticketmaster statement of facts helps OVG avoid future liability, does DOJ gain any advantage from it? Perhaps. According to legal experts, the Ticketmaster statement could help buttress the department\u2019s effort to break up its merger with Live Nation. <\/p>\n

\n\tIt\u2019s not clear whether or not OVG is cooperating with the DOJ against Live Nation and Ticketmaster \u2014 where OVG co-founder Irving Azoff<\/strong> used to be CEO \u2014 as it is\u00a0in the bid-rigging case. Asked about cooperating on non-Leiweke related DOJ matters, OVG sources tell Billboard<\/em> the company would consider requests to provide witness testimony or documents on a case-by-case basis.<\/p>\n

\n\tThere\u2019s some ambiguity as to whether the language of OVG\u2019s non-prosecution agreement could require this type of cooperation. Brent Snyder<\/strong>, the former head of criminal antitrust enforcement at the DOJ who\u2019s now in private practice at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, says the answer seems to be yes based on one glaring clause. <\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cOVG shall cooperate fully with the Antitrust Division in any and all matters relating to the conduct described in this agreement and the attached statements of facts,\u201d reads the agreement\u2019s sixth section.<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\t\t\t\t\tRelated\t\t<\/p>\n<\/h3>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

\t\t\t\t\t\t\"Tim<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n\t\u201cThe \u2018any and all matters relating to the conduct\u2019 language in paragraph 6 is very broad and could be read to require cooperation in both the criminal and civil cases,\u201d Snyder tells Billboard<\/em>. <\/p>\n

\n\tOther experts are less certain. Loeb agrees that while the \u201cany and all matters\u201d sentence is broad, \u201cthe rest of the cooperation provision seems to be talking about criminal cases\u201d only, she says. <\/p>\n

\n\tLoeb notes, for example, that OVG directors and officers are obligated by this agreement to sit for interviews with criminal<\/em> authorities and testify at criminal <\/em>trials. There is no mention of any OVG executives testifying at civil trials, such as the one against Live Nation that\u2019s scheduled to begin next year. <\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cIf this were litigated, I think the company would have the better argument that they are only required to cooperate in criminal cases,\u201d says Loeb. \u201cBut it\u2019s not open and shut.\u201d <\/p>\n

\n\tRichard Powers,<\/strong> former Acting Assistant Attorney General for the DOJ Antitrust Division, similarly sees ambiguity as to whether OVG is required to cooperate against Live Nation and Ticketmaster. <\/p>\n

\n

\n

\t\t\t\t\tRelated\t\t<\/p>\n<\/h3>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

\t\t\t\t\t\t\"Live<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n\t\u201cThe non-prosecution agreement appears to be cabined with \u2018criminal\u2019 language, but could be read to cover the civil case as well,\u201d says Powers. <\/p>\n

\n\tWhile it\u2019s not obvious whether OVG will cooperate against Live Nation in the traditional sense, the statement of facts on its own might be valuable to government antitrust attorneys. That\u2019s because another section of the non-prosecution agreement says OVG employees cannot \u201cmake any statement, in litigation or otherwise, contradicting the statements of facts\u201d \u2014 including the admission that OVG360 steered clients to Ticketmaster in exchange for money. <\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cThat functionally means OVG witnesses in the Ticketmaster case have to agree with those admissions, or else DOJ could find the company in breach of the criminal NPA,\u201d says Powers. \u201cBasically, OVG is boxed in on that issue to the extent DOJ intends to call their executives as witnesses.\u201d <\/p>\n

\n\tReps for Live Nation declined to comment for this story. \u00a0<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Last month, venue manager and developer Oak View Group (OVG) signed a $15 million non-prosecution agreement that allows the live entertainment giant to avoid liability for then-CEO Tim […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":7262,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[294,344,211,6597],"class_list":["post-7261","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-lawyers","tag-case","tag-live","tag-means","tag-nationticketmaster"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7261","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7261"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7261\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/7262"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7261"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7261"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7261"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}