they'll be 100,000 miles of new infrastructure to reach those i. charter communications supports c-span as a public service along with these television providers giving you a front-row seat to announced that it's suing ticketmaster and owner l compans are accused of running illegal monopoly over live events in america, 30 states and district attorneys general are joining in the lawsuit which could dramatically make change to system long frustrated bh artists an fans which cam to e in 2022 when high prices f taylor swift era tour. you a pot first attorney general merrick garland and his remarks

>> earlier today the department ost joined by 29 states and the district of columbia sued live nation and ticket master for violating the sherman anti-trust act. in recent years, live nation ticketaster's exorbitant fees and technological failures have beeit fans and artists alike. but we are not here nation ticket master's conduct ison we are here because as we allege, that conductand illegal. our complaint makes clear happens when a monopolist dedicates its resources to

entrening its monopoly power and insulating itself from competition ratherr than investing in better products and services. we nation has illegal monopolized and it is time to break it up. live nation ticketmaster has made its ubiquitous in live it controls at least 80% of primary ticketing at directly manages more than and controls more than 60% of concert promotions across the country and owns and controls more 60% of large theaters united states , li nation relies on unlawful to control over live event industry

nid bgstates and over the fans, artists, independent promotors and venues that power the industry. the result fans pay more in fees, artists have opportunities to play concerts, smallerand venues have fewer real choices for ticketing services. as detailed in our complaint they lock out ticketing because of largeerm cketing contracts with venues that can last over a decade, as well asy acquiring venues themselves. with exclusive agreements t more than 70% of concert ticket sales at major concert venues across the country, ticket master can impose a seemingl list of fees on fans. those incl ticketing those include service fees, convenience fees, platinum fees,

pricemaster fees, per order fees, hin and payment processing fees among others. for fans in the united states, higher prices. in other countries where venues ar not bound by contracts. an s fees and more innovative ticketing pducts as a result. we also allege that livation ticketmaster using long-term ticketing agreements with venues an to unlawfully pressure artists■' services. sacrifices profits it could earn as aener by letting its venues sit empty rather than open t artists who do not use live nation promotiones.

even during peak concert seasony deployed n anticompetitive tacts to, of course, artists and venues to use services and charge fans excessive fees, it has also worked strategically dly to eliminate the threat of potential b rivals frs businesses its businesses. as detailed in our complaint, live nation a variety of tactics from acquisitions of smaller regional promotors and venues to threats and retaliation, to agreements with rivals designed to neutralize them. this has included acquiring or co-opting key independent promotors even when the particular deal did not make sense for livebusiness. for example, as recounted in our complaint, live nation ac controlling

stake in a.c. entertainment, an independent promotor in tennessee. live nation's chief strategy officer assured executives that even though, quote, the numbers not superexciting and this feels like more of ae mo, the acquisition helped, grow our moat in the nashville m faced with anotr potential competitor, live nation took action to ensure the competitor would not threaten its dominance in the live music industry. live nation initially categorized thator, the venue operator, o.q. group, of its biggest competitor threats. however, oak view and live nation morphed from competitors into in our complaint, live nation executives repeatedly scolded oak view for trying to compete. in one instance in 2016,

live nation c.e.o.warned oak vit competition would only lead to artistsmaing more compensation. the live nation c.e.o. emailed oak view writing, quote, let's make sure we don't let them s us off, referring to a prominent artist agency. oa in a similar instance in 2022, live nation c.e.o. scolded oak view's c.e.o., quote, who be so stupid to do this and play into thest's agent's a? closedown. quote, we have never without you. won't, said a c.e.o., and later added, quote, i never want to be competitors, close quote. we also allege live nation repeatedly wielded its powers to keep its rivals from expanding inhe

concert promotions market through threats retaliation. in 2021 live nation threatened to retaliate against private equity firm silver lake unless one of the ladder's portfolio companies stopped competing with live nation forist promotion contracts in the united states. live nation. told silver lake that he, quote, failed todersnd why silvr lake, quote, continued to invest in a business that competes with live nation, close quote.the threatsy succeeded and silver tried to tell altogether. we allege live nation does not maintain its dominance in the live entertainment industry by staying ahead of its competition on the merits. it does so by unlawfully eliminating its competition. we allege live nation controls the live entertainment industry in t uuse it is breaking

the law. i am grateful to the justice department's anti-trust division for their excellent work of this case. the live entertainment industry is complex and well-sourced. taking on the case requiredsince by the anti-trust lawyers behind me today and their team. i am proud to work with them. people always remember the first time they were transformed by live music. i remember as a senior in college going to a concert and seeing an up-and-coming artist bruce springsteen play as a warm-up act. we didn't know we had just seen the future of rock 'n' roll. the justiceis lawsuit on behalf of fans who should be able to go to concerts without a

monopoly standing in their way. we have filed this lawsuit on behalf of tists who could be able to plan their concerts by their fans dictated by a unlawful monopolist. wee filed this lawsuit on behalf of the promotors and venues who should be t compete on a level playing field. and we have filed this lawsuit eh of the american people. it is time for fanand artists to stop paying the price for live nation's monopoly. it is time to restore competition and entertainment industry. it is me up live nation/ticket master. the american people are ready for it. thank you.■6 and now i'll turn it over to the deputy attorney general. >> good morning, everyone. thank you, mr. atto general. today's announcement

reflects the latest efforts by the department of justice to combat corporate misconduct. since day one of this administration, we've prioritizedolding the most serious corporate wrongdoersntab from bribe payers to money launderers to price our fight against corporate wrongdoing intee focus on anti-competitive conduct, which disadvantages consumers, workers, and businesses of all kinds. as the attorney general detailed, today'slleges that live nation and its subsidiary ticket master eaged n anti-competitive condumit their dominance of the live concert market. it lays out how live nation/ticket master acts as the gatekeeper for an entire industry, reaching its proverbial hands into every stage of life

cycle, from who promotes the shows ter happen to how they are ticketed. its exclusionary conduct, live nation effectively into ths of concertgoers by driving up fees. over the years, live nation has intentionally blocked others out of the market, limiting where shows can take tickets, and who benefits from them. in the complaint, they've employed a range of tactics to keep competitors out of the rk term exclusive ticketing contacts, cereal acquisitions, regional competitors and threatening to retaliate againsttoday's lawsuit by the justice department's anti-trust division an enormous step forward in preventing one company fromic ebbs and flows on entire industry. it's a step fod to give more venues,

pror sellers a chance to compete for the biggest shows. and it's a step forward in making this era of live music more accessible for the fans, the artists, and t industry that supports them. because when families wantatconcert, the add-on fees they need to pay ou bank. when an independent venue wants to host the next big show, theyave the opportunity to compete. and when a wants to publicize an artist, they shouldn't have to fear retaliation. put simply, one company should not have the power to determine who gets to participate in the marketplace. i want to thank the anti-trust division for their work and assistant attorney general cantor for hisp to protect consumers, performers, and small businesses. today always, their work forms part of the

foundation of thencorporate enforcement mission to promote fairness, drive deterrence and to advance the rule of law. thank you. and with that, i'ur it over to assistant attorney general cantor. you aty general garland and deputy attorney general monaco. mr. cantor: the system is broken because ticket masterthe united states and 30s general filed an anti-trust lawsuit that seeks to restore competition by breaking up live nation/ticket master. mr. kanter: the recipe for live mickey agreements,

artists, venues, and fans. live nation/ticket master's dominance h allowed it to exert control over all three. it starts with over artists. today live nation/ticket master represents hundreds of artists through its dominant promotions which controls the organizing,ncing of large concerts. live nio ticket master also owns or controls venues in which these concerts are held. for example, it owns 60 of america's 100 large amphitheaters. these venues, live nation/ticket master not only earns from tickets and fees but also fromsponsorships, and even parking. ticket master's subsidiary, li nion controls primary ticketing and hundreds

of other venues across the country. and it is through theseclusive g arrangements americans face the dreaded t master tax. the seemingly endss set of fees ironically service r convenience fee when they're but. our lawsuit explains through deed allegations how live nation/ticket masteraponized and entrenched its powert the expense of artists and music fans across the entire country. just example,w live nation fought to avoid spending wars ould have returned more money to performers. this is bad news for all especially bad news for not have the power to do spite its already

massive size and power, master has acquired even small and regional live nation feared could one day threaten its dominance. the complaint also alleges live nation/ticket master threatens and choose a different promotor orke artist, you understand what's at stake. use live nati for promotion or risk being locked out. in iwn nation uses its exclusionary conduct as a, quote, a hedge against significant improvements by the competition or even a new c cost of that hedge is one twe for example, brokin website with substandard customer service that still

captures your valuable data. as ticket master has id quote, now we not only know the person that bought the ticket, but also the three people that you're taking to the show. of these ace lawful on its own but taken together, they're even worse. collectively, these practices foreign an impenetrable the live market industry. that's why with tay's lawsuit we seek to hold live nation/ticket master accountable f violating the anti-trust laws. the legendary songwriteand howay described american music as thrhond the truth. this is more than just a clever turn of phrase, it speaks to the importance the public discourse.

mr. howard was right, words and music come together to create one of our country's most cherished forms of free expression. music is the soundtrack for our lives. as a country, it is how we communicate about politics, love and spirtuality, humor, pain, joy, and everything in between. it is here, there, everywhere. live music should not be available only to those who can afford to payaster tax. we are here today to fight for competition so that we can reopen the doors to the music industry for all. thank the antitrust division and the staff who today are the rock stars performing to the delight of an i would also like to thank the attorneys general ins from thels

ofzosas, coecticut, the district of maryland, massachusetts,ois, michigan, minnesota, nada, new hampshire, new jersey, new york, north car oklahoma, oregon, pennsylvania, rhode island, south carolina, tennessee, texas,nia, washington, west virginia, wisconsin and wyoming. they join us today in filing this important case. thank you. >> questions, here. >> i don't know who question. when we talk about the ticketmaster, are we hundreds of thousands in terms of average consumer?

>> good question. >> i think you need consumers what they think of the tax that is that are paying and the fees that they are paying. this amounts to billi o across e entire country and across the entire industry. >> flying over his and with twong january 6th related cases before thert,o have any concerns and is there anything that the justice depart c do or say? >> rightly point o, the justice department has cases before the supreme court so i can't comment on any justice. >> we rarely see doj at this phase of enforcement clearlystet itwould be looking for.

in this case very ticketmaster and live nation, why did you make it so clear and what kind of remty or potential breakup would stop -- >> well, as complaint describes, ticketmaster is an important almostrt in they describe as operation a limit it, the overall dominance of the industry and all the eff on consumers, fans, promoters, artists that we talked about i'm going to le jonathan say>> o address that they

decisive and effectivelutis. we request a remedy that has been used in antitrust law going back over a hundred years which isf. >> next question. >> i have two questions for ther attorney general. neither of them on -- most of us got a solicitationm the former president of the united states saying that the justice department had authorizationn kl him during the mar-a-lago raid. canou give us some clarification on that particular point that he's making and whether or not deadly force is authorized i o interventions including the search of mr. biden's residence time.ice and -- on that one, that allegation is. the docum in the allegation is

ju department standard policy limiting the use force. as the fbi advises it is part of the standardtion's plan for searches and, in fact, it was even the consensual search of president biden's home. >> second question is obviously the house appears poised to move ahead contempt resolution have any comments if you could tell us whether or not you watched theight committee meeting the other night? >> i caught part of that on saturday night live. but seriously, i am very disappointed.th justice departme explained before has gone to extraordinary l to accommodate the legitimate interest of the committees. i haveeea the full and

unredacted report of mr. herr, we permitted mr. herr to testify for over f everything that happened in connection with its the transcripts and the interviews of which the but on the other side, the president of the united states has asserted executive privilege in order to protect the j department's ability in futuregt cooperation in high-profile involving the white house. my job is department's ability to conduct those investigations, my job i d that's what i'm i think to.■g >> last question, caitlin. ions,an first justice department's approval of merger back in 2010 a mistake and then differenttoc- >> one at a time.

>> also on topic or off topic? topic. a different >> on that one our complaint adequately, i will let mr. cantor say a more and i will come back. >> the previous action involved the current action involves pattern of anticompetitive conduct that addresses nearly ev music supply chain. the previous action involvehe clayton act specifically section 7 of the clayton act. the current action is the sherman act, section 2 of the sherman act. >> the justice department said that in court that voters deserve a quick

resolution to the cases against donald trump. if that does notappen and there is not a resolution or any trial before the election wld that be a failure of justice? >> the justice department's trial. that matter is now in the hands of the i'm not going speculate any further. >> thank■ everyone. >> as noted the justice department has announced lawsuits against ticketmaster ar2o■ issues with ticket prices and acss h during taylor era's tour. this portion of the hearing is just over