Ticketmaster Corp. v. Tickets.Com Inc.

MEMORANDUM *

1. To meet its initial burden of establishing that Ticketmaster’s practices unreasonably restrain trade under section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 , Tiekets.com “must show that the activity is the type that restrains trade and that the restraint is likely to be of significant magnitude.” Bhan v. NME Hosps., Inc., 929 F.2d 1404 , 1413 (9th Cir.1991). Tickets.com argues that Ticketmaster’s practices restrain trade because its exclusive contracts with venues are too long-term, foreclose too much competition and make competitive entry too difficult.

In Ferguson v. Greater Pocatello Chamber of Commerce, Inc., 848 F.2d 976, 982 (9th Cir.1988), we affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment upholding a six-year exclusive contract, renewable through competitive bidding, against a section 1 challenge. Six years is about as long as the average duration of Ticketmaster’s venue contracts, and the record here shows that there was substan *348 tial competitive bidding, in which Tickets.com was an active, and sometimes successful, participant. (Not all contracts were renewed through bidding, but the record does not reveal how many were renewed noncompetitively.)…