The Vergecast: The Twist in the Ticketmaster Antitrust Fight

Date: March 10, 2026
Hosts: David Pierce
Guests: Lauren Feiner (The Verge), Hayden Field (The Verge)

Episode Overview

This episode explores two major tech stories:

1. A shocking settlement twist in the Department of Justice (DOJ) antitrust trial against Live Nation-Ticketmaster, featuring in-depth analysis by Verge reporter Lauren Feiner, who has been live at the courthouse.
2. Turbulence between AI companies (Anthropic and OpenAI) and the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), with insights from AI reporter Hayden Field on supply chain risk designations, government contracts, and the broader implications for tech’s relationship with military and surveillance.

The episode also includes a lively Q&A on foldable smartphones.

Segment 1: The Ticketmaster-Live Nation DOJ Settlement

Guest: Lauren Feiner
Timestamps: 02:34–26:09

1. The Day the Settlement Dropped

[03:16]
Lauren recounts a chaotic Monday, March 9th: news breaks early that a settlement in US v. Live Nation-Ticketmaster might be announced, prompting a rush to the courthouse. The courtroom is packed—far more so than usual—indicating high stakes and broad interest from attorneys across multiple states.

“Today I woke up, I saw a Bloomberg report saying a settlement might be announced... By the time I got to court, the room was a lot more full than last week.”
— Lauren Feiner [03:16]

2. Key Terms of the Proposed Settlement

[05:16]

• Live Nation would pay up to $280 million in damages—if all states join the settlement.
• Live Nation must sell several amphitheaters, relinquishing some of its control over key venues.
• Requirements to cap certain ticket fees and allow other ticket providers access at Live Nation-controlled venues—ending some exclusivity and opening the market.
• These stipulations addressed DOJ’s complaints around market access and monopolistic practices.

Lauren’s Explanation:

“They agreed if all the states were to join... pay up to $280 million…sell a bunch of amphitheaters…cap certain ticket fees...”
— Lauren Feiner [05:16]

3. The Long-Brewing Case: Allegations at the Heart

[06:48]

• The DOJ’s case centers on two markets: large concert venues/arenas and amphitheaters.
• Live Nation allegedly creates barriers for rivals, consolidating control by requiring venues to use Ticketmaster’s services to access top Live Nation-contracted artists.
• Tactics described as "mafia style threats" forced arenas to comply, as in the case of the Barclays Center vs. SeatGeek.

“Basically, Live Nation-Ticketmaster controls the biggest artists, biggest venues, and if you want those, you have to use their platforms and play by their rules—the people who lose are anybody trying to use any other part of the system.”
— David Pierce [08:02]

"SeatGeek started offering 'retaliation insurance' to venues—so if Live Nation retaliated, they would make up the lost revenue. That's how hard it is to crack this market."
— Lauren Feiner [09:36]

4. Damning Testimony and the DOJ’s Strategy

[10:53]

• Early trial testimony was perceived as strong for the government, though credibility of witnesses (Barclays CEO fired after switching to SeatGeek) could be debated.
• SeatGeek is highlighted as the main would-be competitor, but doubts remain about whether a truly competitive market would emerge.

5. DOJ Turmoil and the Timing of the Settlement

[11:51, 12:14]

• Internal upheaval at the DOJ antitrust division: top lawyers fired, division chief leaves just before trial.
• Given this fragility, surprise that the case made it to trial at all; even the courtroom judge appeared blindsided by the last-minute settlement, discovered that the deal’s term sheet was signed days before the parties informed the court.

"The judge was pretty upset... The DOJ’s own lead counsel said he’d learned about the signed term sheet this morning—same as the judge!"
— Lauren Feiner [14:43]

6. Was the Settlement a Win for Live Nation?

[16:23]

• Unclear who “won”—the damages are a small fraction of Live Nation’s revenue; theoretically opening their platforms and selling venues may not meaningfully reduce their power.
• Observers question if DOJ “got scared” or simply favored a safe, quick settlement over risking it all on a jury.

“Even if it’s $280 million, that’s nothing to them... DOJ settlement terms fall below what we’d expect if they’d found liability.”
— David Pierce & Lauren Feiner [16:23]

7. Advocates, Swifties, and the States’ Ongoing Fight

[17:53–19:52]

• Taylor Swift fans and others dissatisfied: no meaningful breakup, little real competition.
• 27 states plus D.C. object and plan to continue the case.
• States immediately file for mistrial due to abrupt settlement and logistical hurdles (transferring expert witnesses, new counsel required).
• Trial paused for a week; continuation depends on logistical issues and the judge’s decisions.

"Absolutely, they are really still in pursuit of a broader finding of liability and broader remedy."
— Lauren Feiner [19:52]

8. What Does This Mean for Antitrust Going Forward?

[21:53]

• The case was seen as a “straightforward monopoly trial”—a rarity.
• Historically, winning on monopoly liability is easier than securing meaningful remedies (referencing Google cases).
• DOJ’s stated goal at the case onset was to break up Live Nation-Ticketmaster—this settlement stops well short.
• The changing DOJ leadership and possible political recalibration under the Trump administration left many wondering if this would have played out differently with prior antitrust chiefs.

"It seems like there's a different kind of strategy coming out here. The stated intentions... were to break up Live Nation-Ticketmaster, and that's not what we're seeing now."
— Lauren Feiner [22:01]

9. Next Steps and Unresolved Questions

[23:33–25:47]

• Court reconvenes for testimony from Live Nation CEO & current DOJ antitrust chief.
• States face logistical problems; possible retrial, but the timeline is uncertain.
• Judge is not inclined to rule for a mistrial, but the future course is unclear.
• "This…is a big question mark if [the trial] will [continue]." — Lauren Feiner [24:59]

Segment 2: AI, Anthropic, OpenAI, and the Pentagon

Guest: Hayden Field
Timestamps: 29:49–58:46

1. How Anthropic Became the Pentagon’s Favorite

[30:51]

• Anthropic is the first AI company to have its models deployed on classified government networks and national labs.
• Deep relationship with DoD: extensive Claude deployments, including for military use in Iran.

"Anthropic has a really interesting and unique relationship with the DoD… They have been very, very into being used by the DoD..."
— Hayden Field [30:51]

2. Anthropic’s "Two Red Lines"

[32:15, 39:08]

• Anthropic generally happy to collaborate with DoD, but refused two things:
  1. Use of Claude for mass domestic surveillance.
  2. Use of Claude in fully autonomous weapons.
• Dario Amodei (Anthropic CEO) is open to fully autonomous weapons in the future if tech matures and safety is ensured—but not yet.

"All we want is just these two things everyone should agree on—no mass surveillance, no fully autonomous killing machines."
— Hayden Field [33:06]

3. The Government Designates Anthropic as a "Supply Chain Risk"

[34:13]

• Official designation aimed at pushing Anthropic out of Pentagon contracts.
• Clients (Microsoft, Google, etc.) can still work with Anthropic—just not on military projects; must maintain strict separation.
• Anthropic is preparing to challenge the designation in court.

"Anthropic was designated a supply chain risk...they had to start mobilizing, putting a lot of processes in place."
— Hayden Field [34:13]

4. OpenAI Swoops In – and the Internet Explodes

[38:19–41:43]

• In the aftermath, OpenAI (Sam Altman) announces a new DoD partnership, flaunting the deal on Twitter.
• Backlash is immediate: OpenAI is accused of being opportunistic and unconcerned about serious ethical red lines.
• Uproar results in Altman publicly backtracking and apologizing, but ultimately the legal terms remain unchanged (AI for "any lawful use," with no specific bans).

"It was absolutely immediate backlash...he could not get away from the bad press for a week plus—even now."
— Hayden Field [40:58]

"It's a remarkable self-own… ‘We signed a deal for things Anthropic said no to: autonomous weapons and mass surveillance.’"
— David Pierce [41:22]

5. The Core Dilemma: Tech Responsibility vs. Government Power

[44:05–46:03]

• Who decides how AI is used: the companies who create it, or democratically elected officials?
• The phrase "any lawful use" is heavily scrutinized—past legal frameworks have justified mass surveillance and controversial government programs.
• Anthropic wants to retain control over certain uses, OpenAI (and others) say government rules should prevail.

"On one hand: who the hell is [Anthropic CEO] Dario Amodei to decide US government policy? On the other: look at what this government has done in the past—that’s why tech companies have some responsibility."
— David Pierce [45:51]

6. Why These Fights Set AI's Precedent

[47:58]

• The boundaries drawn in these contracts will shape AI regulatory and ethical frameworks going forward.
• Mass surveillance with AI presents new, significant risks for profiling and privacy.

"It’s such a question of our times, and this is going to set a lot of precedent."
— Hayden Field [46:03]

7. The Business Impact: Can Anthropic Survive?

[52:14]

• Anthropic loses a $200m DoD contract, but public and tech-industry sympathy (and talent migration) is on their side.
• Ultimate impact depends on court decisions and whether other government agencies interpret the supply chain risk ban broadly.
• If they’re successful with enterprise contracts (and the branding of “the most adult in the room”), Anthropic may hold on.

"Right now, they're surviving on a lot of enterprise contracts, and there's a lot of grassroots support for them…But, you know, we'll see how it plays out."
— Hayden Field [54:21]

8. The Tech Industry Culture War: Should Tech Work With the Military?

[54:21–57:48]

• Employee attitudes are shifting: some see DoD contracts as inevitable for economic survival, others believe there must be red lines.
• More grassroots organizing and open letters; employee power is growing, reminiscent of Google’s Maven protests—but with less speed or unanimity now.
• Many developers are moving companies to align with their values, especially joining Anthropic from OpenAI.

"People are actually looking at who is in charge. If you can trust any of them—we don't know…We're seeing OpenAI employees resign and leave for Anthropic."
— Hayden Field [49:17]

Segment 3: Vergecast Hotline — Foldable Phones Q&A

Host: David Pierce
Timestamps: 62:49–end

Listener’s Question:

Why did “passport–iPad mini” style foldable phones (e.g., original Pixel Fold) fail to catch on? Would a smaller, wide-opening foldable make sense as a real innovation—or do clamshell foldables hold more appeal?

David’s Analysis:

• Foldables (phones that get bigger when opened) haven’t justified their purpose—no clear “killer app.”
• Samsung’s and Google’s approaches haven’t delivered on real, daily-use advantages.
• Flip-phones (clamshells) “make more sense”—they get smaller in your pocket, offer a different use case, and have better potential for unique notification/interruption experiences.
• Apple’s rumored approach may only succeed if they can articulate a compelling use case and deliver meaningful software integrations—something that’s still missing on Android.
• Most users still upgrade to bigger, not smaller, phones—and developers haven’t reimagined what’s possible with extra screen real estate.

"If you want to deviate from the candy bar phone, you have to make a really good case…[With foldables] there just isn’t yet an obvious killer app."
— David Pierce [64:47+]

Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Lauren Feiner on the surprise settlement:
  “The judge was pretty upset… the DOJ’s lead counsel said he’d learned about the signed term sheet this morning — same as the judge!” [14:43]
• Hayden Field on the real AI dilemma:
  "It all comes down to this: ‘any lawful use’ and who’s responsible… this is going to set a lot of precedent." [46:03]
• David Pierce on antitrust:
  “Google keeps losing antitrust cases and it keeps winning at the remedies, because the remedies are just sort of nonsense for the most part…” [20:36]

Key Takeaways

• Live Nation-Ticketmaster may escape without losing its monopoly power, despite years of government effort. The settlement is seen as a let-down by many advocates and observers, but 27+ states are vowing to push for a fuller trial.
• The collapse of Anthropic’s DoD deal exposes huge rifts in tech’s approach to military work, with OpenAI swooping in but facing major backlash. The distinction between “any lawful use” and values-driven refusal sets the battle lines for future AI governance.
• The war for tech talent is playing out via these philosophical divides: which company is the “adult in the room,” and where will the brightest minds go?
• Foldable phones still lack a compelling answer to “what is this for”—future success hinges on articulating a reason and building software that leverages the new form factors.

For more episodes, call in your questions (866-Verge11) or email vergecast@theverge.com. The news doesn’t stop, and neither does The Vergecast!