Publications

On September 18, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”), along with seven states,[1] filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Central District of California.[2] This complaint alleges that Ticketmaster LLC (“Ticketmaster”) and its parent company Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. (“Live Nation”) (collectively “Ticketmaster”) have “deceived artists and consumers by engaging in bait-and-switch pricing through advertising lower prices for tickets than what consumers must pay to purchase tickets; deceptively claimed to impose strict limits on the number of tickets that consumers could purchase for an event . . . ; and sold millions of tickets, often a much higher cost to consumers, on its resale platform . . . in excess of artists’ ticket limits.”[3] In essence, the FTC is alleging that Ticketmaster is deceptively inflating the ticket prices paid by the average ticket buyer.

Central to these allegations is Ticketmaster’s alleged relationship with brokers (i.e., individuals or companies that have purchased tickets and then sell them on the secondary market). The FTC alleges that Ticketmaster publicly states that its business model is at odds with brokers that routinely exceed ticket purchase limits (i.e., caps on the number of tickets any one individual can purchase). Yet, in private, Ticketmaster acknowledges that it benefits from brokers preventing ordinary ticket purchasers from acquiring tickets at the prices set by the artists.[4] Indeed, the FTC alleges that Ticketmaster enables such bad acts through, among other things, engaging in the following:

1. Ticketmaster is aware that brokers bypass security measures by creating thousands of Ticketmaster accounts and using proxy IP addresses to purchase event tickets in bulk, in violation of Ticketmaster’s stated policies.[5]
2. Ticketmaster then allows brokers to post these illegally obtained tickets for resale on its resale platform, profiting from additional fees and markups it unilaterally adds to the resale tickets.[6]
3. A senior Ticketmaster executive admitted that Ticketmaster “turn[ed] a blind eye as a matter of policy to the violations of posted ticket limits.”[7]
4. Ticketmaster offers technical support to brokers through its platform, TradeDesk, which enables brokers to track and aggregate tickets purchased from multiple Ticketmaster accounts into a single interface for simpler resale management.[8]
5. Ticketmaster has opted to not implement technological tools that could prevent these actions, including, for example, in 2021 refusing to implement third-party identity verification because it was “too effective.”[9]
6. Ticketmaster posts ticket prices that are substantially lower than the actual cost consumers will pay after fees and markups are added. The FTC alleges that Ticketmaster hid the mandatory fees, which are as high as 44% of the cost of the ticket until the very end, when consumers are often under time pressure to purchase tickets. Ticketmaster earned $16.4 billion in such fees between 2019-24.[10]
7. Despite public statements in favor of full-cost transparency, Ticketmaster refused to change its policy because internal research suggested that consumers were less likely to purchase tickets when they are informed of the true cost upfront.[11]

This complaint alleges that these practices violated the FTC Act’s prohibition on deceptive acts or practice in the marketplace and the Better Online Ticket Sales Act (“BOTS Act”)[12], which was passed with the intention of limiting the role that bots play in the ticket sales industry. The FTC is seeking civil penalties against Ticketmaster for these alleged violations. In addition to bringing claims under the BOTS Act[13], six of the seven states are also seeking civil penalties, fines, and/or forfeitures in accordance with their respective state consumer protection statutes.[14]

Relationship to Other Cases Against Live Nation

The FTC’s case against Ticketmaster is part of an ongoing series of investigations into the online ticketing business. In May 2024, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) brought a lawsuit against Ticketmaster alleging monopolistic practices and abuse of power in the online ticket business in violation of the antitrust laws, for, among other things, leveraging Live Nation’s dominance in concert touring to coerce venues into signing contracts with Ticketmaster to exclusively distribute tickets to certain high-profile events, including the 2022 Taylor Swift “Eras” Tour.[15]

In response to growing consumer backlash, President Trump signed an executive order on March 31, 2025, targeting alleged “unscrupulous middlemen who sit at the intersection between artists and fans and impose egregious fees while providing minimal value.”[16] In this Executive Order, President Trump directed the FTC to “rigorously enforce” the BOTS Act as well as the FTC Act to target alleged abusive practices in the broker business.[17]  Accordingly, the FTC’s announcement of this lawsuit references the Trump Administration’s desire to pursue online ticketing companies vigorously.

Wiggin and Dana routinely advises clients in connection with the full range of antitrust, consumer protection, and unfair trade practices matters, including potential transactions and representations before the FTC, DOJ, and offices of state attorneys general. Wiggin and Dana also regularly advises clients concerning evolving antitrust, consumer protection, and unfair trade practices, and regulatory landscapes.

[1] Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Nebraska, Tennessee, Utah, and Virginia.

[2] FTC et al v. Live Nation Entertainment, Inc., 25-cv-08884. (C.D. Cal. Sept. 18, 2025) (ECF No. 1) (the “Complaint”).

[3] Complaint at ¶¶ 12-17.

[4] Complaint at ¶ 14.

[5] Complaint at ¶ 80.

[6] Complaint at ¶¶ 82-83.

[7] Complaint at ¶ 90.

[8] Complaint at ¶¶ 104-106.

[9] Complaint at ¶ 99.

[10] Complaint at ¶ 36.

[11] Complain at ¶¶ 51-54.

[12] 15 U.S.C. 45c.

[13] 15 U.S.C. § 45c(c)(1) (permitting states to bring claims under BOTS Act).

[14] These state statutes are: the Colorado Consumer Protection Act, the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, the Nebraska Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act, the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act, the Illinois Deceptive Trade Practices Act, and the Utah Consumer Sales Practices Act.

[15] United States et al v. Live Nation Entertainment, Inc., 24-cv-03973 (S.D.N.Y. May 23, 2024) (ECF No. 1.) (“DOJ Complaint”).

[16] “Combating Unfair Practices in the Live Entertainment Market.” Executive Order 14254, Section 1(a). March 31, 2025. (“EO 14254”).

[17] EO 14254, Section 2(a-e).