1. United States v. Live Nation Entertainment
In April 2026, a federal jury found Live Nation and subsidiary Ticketmaster willfully operated a monopoly on all counts and overcharged customers $1.72 per ticket on average. Live Nation asked the judge to set aside the jury’s verdict or grant a new trial.
The lawsuit was filed in May 2024 and the trial began in March 2026. The suit alleged the company blocks competition with exclusionary contracts, leveraging its control over ticketing at 80% of major concert venues. Antitrust authorities had criticized Live Nation since the 2010 merger with Ticketmaster.
"For too long, Live Nation and Ticketmaster have unfairly and illegally run the world of live events, abusing their dominance to overcharge fans, bully venues, and limit artists," New York Attorney General Letitia James said when the lawsuit was announced. "When companies like Live Nation control every aspect of an event, it leads to bad blood -- concertgoers and sports fans suffer and are forced to pay more. Everybody agrees, Live Nation and Ticketmaster are the problem and it's time for a new era. Today, we are taking this important action to protect consumers and force big companies to stop abusing their influence and get in formation."
President Donald Trump called for an end to concert ticket price-gouging through an executive order signed in March 2025 alongside musician Kid Rock as “common sense reforms to America’s live entertainment ticketing industry.”
Three weeks before the trial was set to begin, the Justice Department’s antitrust chief Gail Slater was removed from office and public confidence in the potential breakup began to fall. The parties reached a settlement seven days after the trial’s opening statements and six plaintiff states — Arkansas, Iowa, Mississippi, Nebraska, Oklahoma and South Dakota exited the trial.
The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump pushed for the settlement and met with Live Nation CEO Michael Rapino about improving bookings at the Kennedy Center after Slater was ousted.
Texas and 32 other states called for a mistrial and continued litigation. The court is now awaiting rulings on multiple motions Live Nation raised to contest the jury’s verdict. Crowell & Moring a law firm analyzing the case, said a final outcome will not be known for years.
The states presented damages of $1.72 per ticket on average which will be used to calculate total damages, according to Crowell & Moring. The amount will be tripled under the Clayton Act and applied to 20% of ticket sales (excluding ticket brokers) across 257 venues over the past five years. The figure could approach $450 million before offsets.
“No corporation should be allowed to illegally monopolize an industry, but that is exactly what Live Nation has done with its anticompetitive scheme to control concert prices and take advantage of fans, venues, and music artists,” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said.
2. UMG, Sony, Warner (via RIAA) v. Suno and Udio
The Recording Industry Association of America filed two lawsuits against artificial intelligence music companies Suno and Udio, alleging the companies used copyrighted works without permission to train their software.
Warner and UMG have settled and formed separate, undisclosed music licensing agreements with the AI music companies. Sony is still in litigation with both Suno and Udio and UMG’s case against Suno remains active. The final verdict may determine whether AI music training is fair use.
Warner UMG and Sony v. Suno (June 2024)
(Warner settled)
Warner UMG and Sony v. Udio (June 2024)
(Warner and UMG settled)
Since the settlements in 2025, requests to publish Suno’s settlement terms have been blocked, Music Business Worldwide reported.
3. American Federation of Musicians of the United States and Canada v. Universal Music Group
The American Federation of Musicians alleges Universal Music Group has licensed sound recordings of AFM-represented musicians to Suno and Udio without compensation or credit, violating the union’s collective bargaining agreement.
Filed in June, after UMG’s settlement with Suno and Udio, the record labels motioned to dismiss the case, who argue that training an AI model doesn’t qualify as a “new use” of its recordings.
The “new use” provision requires payment to session musicians when a track is used in a new medium, such as a commercial, podcast or video game. Session musicians whose performances make up the recordings are owed payments for their work, according to the collective bargaining agreement.
Court filings show UMG never publicized its settlement agreements with Udio. The scope of session musicians’ work training AI models is unknown and damages are impossible to calculate.
“Record labels built multi-million-dollar AI deals on the backs of our members, yet the artists whose life’s work powered these technologies haven’t received a single dime,” AFM International President Tino Gagliardi said in a press release. “The labels cannot pocket massive payouts while cutting working musicians out of the equation. This lawsuit is about transparency, accountability, and ensuring our artists receive every cent of the ‘new use’ royalties guaranteed to them under our collective bargaining agreement.”
In response to the AFM suit, a UMG spokesperson told Music Business Worldwide in a statement: “Universal Music Group has been at the forefront of protecting the rights and advancing the interests of artists and songwriters in the age of AI—striking responsible AI licensing agreements to ensure they are compensated, leading the charge for legislation to further protect them and taking legal action against bad actors.”
Eyad Asad of Cohen, Weiss & Simon is representing AFM in the litigation.