According to a report by Billboard, musician Ozzy Osbourne has had his antitrust lawsuit against AEG dismissed with prejudice after company officials announced plans to end its policy requiring acts that wanted to play the O2 Arena in London to also play Staples Center in Los Angeles.
On Friday, September 21, Osbourne’s attorney Daniel Wall filed a stipulation to dismiss the case, ending the lawsuit filed in March against AEG. The case was dismissed with prejudice, meaning Osbourne can’t refile the lawsuit.
AEG had used a clause in its contracts with performers that required performers who used the O2 arena to also perform at the Staples Center, allegedly to counter Azoff MSG’s reported block-booking requirement that performers play at The Forum in Los Angeles to get access to Madison Square Garden in New York.
AEG announced it would drop its policy, contingent to Azoff’s own alleged policy not returning. Nine days after AEG’s announcement, Osbourne dismissed his lawsuit.
AEG stated in response to the dismissal that, “The Osbourne suit was instigated by Azoff and paid for by MSG and Live Nation. It was hatched on the back of an artist who we believe had no idea what he was biting off. The suit was a transparent public relations ploy that failed to pressure AEG into backing down from a booking policy that was an effective competitive response to the MSG-Forum tie.”
Ozzy had tentatively agreed to perform at London’s O2 Arena on February 11, 2019, as part of his “No More Tours 2” farewell run, but he claimed that AEG added a provision stating that if Osbourne played an indoor arena within 25 miles of Los Angeles that was promoted by competitor Live Nation during the tour, he would have to play the AEG-owned Staples Center as well.
Osbourne wanted a judge to invalidate the provision in his contract that forced him to perform at Staples.
Full Content: Billboard
Featured News
CVS Health Explores Potential Breakup Amid Investor Pressure: Report
Oct 3, 2024 by
CPI
DirecTV Acquires Dish TV, Creating 20 Million-Subscriber Powerhouse
Oct 3, 2024 by
CPI
South Korea Fines Kakao Mobility $54.8 Million for Anti-Competitive Practices
Oct 3, 2024 by
CPI
Google Offers Settlement in India’s Antitrust Case Regarding Smart TVs
Oct 3, 2024 by
CPI
Attorney Challenges NCAA’s $2.78 Billion Settlement in Landmark Antitrust Cases
Oct 3, 2024 by
nhoch@pymnts.com
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Refusal to Deal
Sep 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust’s Refusal-to-Deal Doctrine: The Emperor Has No Clothes
Sep 27, 2024 by
Erik Hovenkamp
Why All Antitrust Claims are Refusal to Deal Claims and What that Means for Policy
Sep 27, 2024 by
Ramsi Woodcock
The Aspen Misadventure
Sep 27, 2024 by
Roger Blair & Holly P. Stidham
Refusal to Deal in Antitrust Law: Evolving Jurisprudence and Business Justifications in the Align Technology Case
Sep 27, 2024 by
Timothy Hsieh