A federal jury in Manhattan found Wednesday that Live Nation Entertainment and its Ticketmaster subsidiary illegally maintained monopoly power over the live event ticketing market, dealing a significant legal blow to the concert industry giant.

The jury deliberated for four days before reaching its verdict in a closely watched antitrust case brought by more than 30 U.S. states. The civil lawsuit accused Live Nation of using its market dominance to stifle competition, including blocking venues from using multiple ticket sellers and engaging in anticompetitive practices that drove up prices for consumers.

According to attorneys for the states, Ticketmaster controls 86% of the market for concerts and 73% of the overall ticketing market when sports events are included. Live Nation Entertainment owns, operates, controls booking for or has an equity interest in hundreds of venues across the United States and beyond, while Ticketmaster is considered the world's largest ticket-seller for live events.

The trial featured testimony from Live Nation CEO Michael Rapino, who was questioned about various company practices including the 2022 Taylor Swift ticket sales debacle. Internal company messages were also presented as evidence, including communications from a Live Nation executive that disparaged customers and described pricing practices in unfavorable terms.

The case originally included claims by the federal government, but the Trump administration announced a settlement with Live Nation earlier this month. That agreement includes caps on service fees at some amphitheaters and new ticket-selling options for promoters and venues, but does not require Live Nation to divest Ticketmaster. However, the majority of states chose to continue with the trial, arguing the federal settlement was insufficient.

Live Nation has maintained throughout the proceedings that it is not a monopoly, with company attorneys arguing that artists, sports teams and venues ultimately decide prices and ticketing practices. The company's legal team contended that Live Nation's market position resulted from business excellence rather than anticompetitive behavior.