<p>在追究此案的 33 个州和哥伦比亚特区获得胜利之际，陪审团最近裁定 Live Nation-Ticketmaster 是违反联邦和州反垄断法的垄断企业。</p>
<p>法院的救济措施和财务处罚预计将由负责此案的法官裁定，但问题是何时裁定，以及提起此案的各州应采取何种措施以确保消费者能够尽早获得真正的救济？</p>
<p>法庭上提交的证据清楚地表明了为何这一垄断裁决是合理的。内部私人消息显示，Live Nation-Ticketmaster 的高管们公开讨论他们 “宰割” 粉丝的能力，并开玩笑说要 “抢劫他们”，因为消费者通常没有其他地方可以购买门票。</p>
<p>法庭证词显示，Ticketmaster 在主要场馆的初级票务市场中控制了大约 86% 的份额，而其母公司 Live Nation 拥有或控制 78% 的大型露天剧场。这种控制程度是垂直整合——一个公司主导供应链的多个层面——最明显的形式，减少了有意义的竞争并抬高了价格。</p>
<p>考虑到这些市场现实，Live Nation 的门票销售量大约是其最接近竞争对手的 10 倍也就不足为奇了，陪审团最终得出的结论是该公司准备、愿意并能够对消费者收取过高费用。然而，尽管陪审团的裁决令人鼓舞，但单靠这一裁决并不能解决问题。</p>
<p>Live Nation-Ticketmaster 案现在进入了可能持续数年的漫长上诉过程——这一现实已被该公司的领导层承认，他们在全体员工的电子邮件中将这一裁决描述为 “更长法律程序中的一步”，并强调目前仍然是 “照常营业”。随着 Ticketmaster 表示其意图积极对抗结果并拖延诉讼，任何有意义的问责制可能只会在遥远的未来到来，而不是提供接近及时的救济。</p>
<p>这正是各州现在应利用其影响力的原因——在裁决新鲜之际——以推动达成锁定真正消费者保护的和解，而不是等待数年让上诉程序走完。如果 Ticketmaster 拖延这样的救济，国会已经在与各州并行推进，这一前景为这些州提供了更多的和解杠杆。</p>
<p>国会已经提出了一项蓝图，正是各州在和解中应寻求的救济类型。</p>
<p>《TICKET 法案》获得了两党支持，要求所有票价透明，以便消费者能够在购买时看到门票的全部费用（包括费用）——就像他们购买机票时一样，同时确保所有票务公司为取消的活动提供全额退款。该法案已在众议院以 409 票对 15 票通过，现在等待参议院投票。</p>
<p>但实施这一透明度措施，尽管早已迫切需要，并且是票务改革对话的关键起点，单靠这一措施并不足以解决行业的问题。各州还应推动和解条款，以开放市场以促进更多竞争。</p>
<p>这一对话应从保护粉丝将门票转让或转售到他们选择的票务平台的自由开始。</p>
<p>Ticketmaster 通过其 SafeTix 技术越来越多地推动不可转让的门票，这使得门票只能在 Ticketmaster 自己的市场上转售——巩固了该公司的市场主导地位。司法部和各州的投诉称，推动不可转让门票的主要动机是 “使希望购买或出售的粉丝更难使用竞争对手的票务平台”，而 Ticketmaster 称 SafeTix 是 “市场份额的产品增强”，并且是 “降低 Ticketmaster 经济风险” 的机会。</p>
<p>垄断企业对其竞争对手施加监管障碍并没有任何促进竞争的意义，任何和解都应禁止这种做法。粉丝们还要忍受多少垄断行为？</p>
<p>这个市场还应推动行业朝着更开放的分销系统发展。</p>
<p>航空票务提供了一个有用的模型，展示了真正竞争的样子。消费者可以通过多个平台预订同一座位——无论是直接通过航空公司还是通过 Expedia 或 KAYAK 等网站——每个平台在价格、便利性和服务上竞争。一旦座位被购买，它将在系统中标记为不可用。喜剧、音乐会和体育赛事的票务市场也应如此。它应当是开放和互操作的，以便没有单一的守门人可以从头到尾控制消费者的访问。</p>
<p>重大的反垄断案件并不常见，当它们出现时，提供了重置规则的罕见机会。</p>
<p>通过评估证据并作出裁决，陪审团完成了他们的工作。各州应推动达成能够立即带来有意义改革的和解，而在裁决的情况下，他们拥有最大的杠杆。同时，参议院应当采取行动，为开放市场立法。</p>
<p>那将是多么美好的事情，各州的律师与国会竞相让美国对粉丝更加开放？我们迫不及待想看看谁能赢得这场比赛，因为如果他们中的任何一个没有成功，美国就会失去。</p>
<p><em>肯·库奇内利（Ken Cuccinelli）是弗吉尼亚州的前检察长，德鲁·凯特勒（Drew Ketterer）是缅因州的前检察长。</em></p>

现场之国娱乐

<p>陪审团裁定，现场之国娱乐 - 票务大师是一个违反反垄断法的垄断企业，这可能导致法院的补救措施和处罚。该裁决突显了票务大师对 86% 主要票务市场的控制以及其对消费者造成伤害的做法。各州被敦促利用这一裁决进行即时改革，包括推动 TICKET 法案以实现透明定价和竞争。此案可能面临漫长的上诉过程，但各州应寻求能够增强消费者保护并促进更具竞争力的票务市场的和解</p>

<p>In a win for the 33 states and the District of Columbia that pursued the case to trial, a jury recently decided that Live Nation-Ticketmaster is a monopoly in violation of federal and state antitrust laws.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>在追究此案的 33 个州和哥伦比亚特区获得胜利之际，陪审团最近裁定 Live Nation-Ticketmaster 是违反联邦和州反垄断法的垄断企业。</p>
</div><p>Court remedies and financial penalties are expected to come from the judge overseeing the case, but the question is when, and what should the states that brought this case be doing to ensure that consumers see real relief sooner rather than later?</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>法院的救济措施和财务处罚预计将由负责此案的法官裁定，但问题是何时裁定，以及提起此案的各州应采取何种措施以确保消费者能够尽早获得真正的救济？</p>
</div><p>The evidence presented in court made clear why this monopolization ruling was warranted. Private internal messages showed Live Nation-Ticketmaster executives openly discussing their ability to “gouge” fans and joking about “robbing them blind” because consumers often have nowhere else to turn to purchase tickets.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>法庭上提交的证据清楚地表明了为何这一垄断裁决是合理的。内部私人消息显示，Live Nation-Ticketmaster 的高管们公开讨论他们 “宰割” 粉丝的能力，并开玩笑说要 “抢劫他们”，因为消费者通常没有其他地方可以购买门票。</p>
</div><p>The court testimony showed that Ticketmaster controls roughly 86 percent of primary ticketing at major venues, while its parent company, Live Nation, owns or controls 78 percent of large amphitheaters. This degree of control is vertical integration — one company dominating multiple layers of the supply chain — in its clearest form, which reduces meaningful competition and raises prices.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>法庭证词显示，Ticketmaster 在主要场馆的初级票务市场中控制了大约 86% 的份额，而其母公司 Live Nation 拥有或控制 78% 的大型露天剧场。这种控制程度是垂直整合——一个公司主导供应链的多个层面——最明显的形式，减少了有意义的竞争并抬高了价格。</p>
</div><p>Given these marketplace realities, it is little wonder why Live Nation sells roughly 10 times as many tickets as its closest rival, and why the case’s jury ultimately concluded that the company was ready, willing and able to overcharge consumers. However, the jury’s verdict, although encouraging, will not fix the problem on its own.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>考虑到这些市场现实，Live Nation 的门票销售量大约是其最接近竞争对手的 10 倍也就不足为奇了，陪审团最终得出的结论是该公司准备、愿意并能够对消费者收取过高费用。然而，尽管陪审团的裁决令人鼓舞，但单靠这一裁决并不能解决问题。</p>
</div><p>The Live Nation-Ticketmaster case is now headed into what may be a prolonged appeals process stretching over years — a reality the company’s leadership has acknowledged, describing the ruling in an all-staff e-mail as just “one step in a much longer legal process” and emphasizing that, for now, it remains “business as usual.” With Ticketmaster signaling its intent to contest the outcome aggressively and drag out the litigation, any meaningful accountability may arrive only in the distant future, rather than offering anything close to timely relief.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>Live Nation-Ticketmaster 案现在进入了可能持续数年的漫长上诉过程——这一现实已被该公司的领导层承认，他们在全体员工的电子邮件中将这一裁决描述为 “更长法律程序中的一步”，并强调目前仍然是 “照常营业”。随着 Ticketmaster 表示其意图积极对抗结果并拖延诉讼，任何有意义的问责制可能只会在遥远的未来到来，而不是提供接近及时的救济。</p>
</div><p>That is precisely why the states should use their leverage now — while the verdict is fresh — to press for a settlement that locks in real consumer protections, rather than waiting years for appeals to run their course. And if Ticketmaster delays such relief, Congress is already moving forward in parallel with the states, a prospect that provides those states with even more settlement leverage.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>这正是各州现在应利用其影响力的原因——在裁决新鲜之际——以推动达成锁定真正消费者保护的和解，而不是等待数年让上诉程序走完。如果 Ticketmaster 拖延这样的救济，国会已经在与各州并行推进，这一前景为这些州提供了更多的和解杠杆。</p>
</div><p>Congress has already advanced a blueprint for exactly the kind of relief the states should seek in a settlement.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>国会已经提出了一项蓝图，正是各州在和解中应寻求的救济类型。</p>
</div><p>The TICKET Act, which has bipartisan support, would require all-in pricing so consumers see the full cost of tickets (inclusive of fees) upfront — just like they do when purchasing airline tickets — while ensuring that all ticketing companies provide full refunds for canceled events. The bill already passed the House of Representatives on a 409-15 vote, and it now awaits a Senate vote.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>《TICKET 法案》获得了两党支持，要求所有票价透明，以便消费者能够在购买时看到门票的全部费用（包括费用）——就像他们购买机票时一样，同时确保所有票务公司为取消的活动提供全额退款。该法案已在众议院以 409 票对 15 票通过，现在等待参议院投票。</p>
</div><p>But implementing this transparency measure, although long overdue and a critical starting point for the ticketing reform conversation, won’t be enough to fix the industry’s problems on its own. The states should also push for settlement terms that open the marketplace up to more competition.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>但实施这一透明度措施，尽管早已迫切需要，并且是票务改革对话的关键起点，单靠这一措施并不足以解决行业的问题。各州还应推动和解条款，以开放市场以促进更多竞争。</p>
</div><p>That conversation should start with protecting fans’ freedom to transfer or resell tickets onto their ticketing platform of choice.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>这一对话应从保护粉丝将门票转让或转售到他们选择的票务平台的自由开始。</p>
</div><p>Ticketmaster has increasingly pushed non-transferable tickets through its SafeTix technology, which prevents tickets from being resold anywhere but Ticketmaster’s own marketplace — solidifying the company’s marketplace dominance. The Department of Justice and the states’ complaint says that a primary motivation behind its push for a non-transferrable ticket was to “make it more difficult for a fan who wishes to buy or sell … to use a rival [ticketing] platform,” with Ticketmaster calling SafeTix a “product enhancement for market share” and an opportunity to “reduce [Ticketmaster’s] economic risk.”</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>Ticketmaster 通过其 SafeTix 技术越来越多地推动不可转让的门票，这使得门票只能在 Ticketmaster 自己的市场上转售——巩固了该公司的市场主导地位。司法部和各州的投诉称，推动不可转让门票的主要动机是 “使希望购买或出售的粉丝更难使用竞争对手的票务平台”，而 Ticketmaster 称 SafeTix 是 “市场份额的产品增强”，并且是 “降低 Ticketmaster 经济风险” 的机会。</p>
</div><p>There is nothing pro-competitive about a monopoly imposing regulatory roadblocks on its competition, and any settlement should prohibit the practice. How much more monopoly behavior do fans have to put up with?</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>垄断企业对其竞争对手施加监管障碍并没有任何促进竞争的意义，任何和解都应禁止这种做法。粉丝们还要忍受多少垄断行为？</p>
</div><p>This market should also move the industry toward a more open distribution system.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>这个市场还应推动行业朝着更开放的分销系统发展。</p>
</div><p>Airline tickets offer a useful model for what real competition looks like. Consumers can book the same seat across multiple platforms — whether directly through the airline or via sites like Expedia or KAYAK — with each platform competing on price, convenience and service. Once a seat is purchased, it’s simply marked as unavailable across the system. The comedy, concert and sporting ticketing marketplace should work the same way. It should be open and interoperable so that no single gatekeeper can control consumers’ access from start to finish.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>航空票务提供了一个有用的模型，展示了真正竞争的样子。消费者可以通过多个平台预订同一座位——无论是直接通过航空公司还是通过 Expedia 或 KAYAK 等网站——每个平台在价格、便利性和服务上竞争。一旦座位被购买，它将在系统中标记为不可用。喜剧、音乐会和体育赛事的票务市场也应如此。它应当是开放和互操作的，以便没有单一的守门人可以从头到尾控制消费者的访问。</p>
</div><p>Major antitrust cases do not come along often, and when they do, they offer a rare opportunity to reset the rules of the road.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>重大的反垄断案件并不常见，当它们出现时，提供了重置规则的罕见机会。</p>
</div><p>By evaluating the evidence and reaching a verdict, the jury has done its job. The states should press for a settlement that delivers meaningful reform now, while the verdict gives them maximum leverage. At the same time, the Senate should step up and legislate for an open market.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>通过评估证据并作出裁决，陪审团完成了他们的工作。各州应推动达成能够立即带来有意义改革的和解，而在裁决的情况下，他们拥有最大的杠杆。同时，参议院应当采取行动，为开放市场立法。</p>
</div><p>How nice would that be, state lawyers racing Congress to make America more open for fans? We can’t wait to see who wins this race, because if one of them doesn’t get there, America loses.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>那将是多么美好的事情，各州的律师与国会竞相让美国对粉丝更加开放？我们迫不及待想看看谁能赢得这场比赛，因为如果他们中的任何一个没有成功，美国就会失去。</p>
</div><p><em>Ken Cuccinelli, a Republican, is a former attorney general for the Commonwealth of Virginia. Drew Ketterer, a Democrat, is a former attorney general for the State of Maine.</em></p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><em>肯·库奇内利（Ken Cuccinelli）是弗吉尼亚州的前检察长，德鲁·凯特勒（Drew Ketterer）是缅因州的前检察长。</em></p>
</div>

Ticketmaster 的垄断裁决为实质性改革铺平了道路