News
Bryan Sullivan Speaks to The Mirror on Macklemore’s Potential Antitrust Claims Against Robert Kraft
Bryan Sullivan was recently quoted in The Mirror discussing the potential legal options available to rapper Macklemore after he was allegedly barred from performing at Gillette Stadium following his appearance on Ed Sheeran’s Loop Tour.
Bryan explains that Robert Kraft could generally decide whether to host Macklemore at Gillette Stadium.
“If one venue owner independently decides not to host a performer, that is generally lawful,” Bryan tells The Mirror. “However, if competing stadium owners collectively agree to deny a performer access to a significant portion of the market, antitrust concerns become more substantial. The analysis would focus on whether there was coordinated action that restrained competition in the market for concert venues or live entertainment services.”
Furthermore, the article explores whether Macklemore could pursue a claim under Section 1 of the Sherman Act based on an alleged agreement among competing venue operators.
He shares that the claim could be based on the argument that “the alleged conduct constituted a horizontal agreement among competing venue operators to refuse to deal with a particular artist.”
Bryan goes on to identify the type of evidence that could be significant to such a claim.
“A communication showing an agreement or ultimatum among competing venue operators would be highly significant,” he explains, adding that an “email, text message, meeting note, or witness testimony” showing that multiple stadium owners agreed to collectively refuse to host Macklemore or pressure a tour to remove him “would dramatically strengthen an antitrust case.”
“Conversely, evidence showing that each venue independently evaluated and rejected the booking for its own reasons would substantially weaken such a claim,” Bryan concludes.