≡Menu

Category Archives: Antitrust

April 09

Antitrust

Live Nation Ticketmaster Antitrust Lawsuit Settlement and What It Means for Competition

Prior to the 2010 merger, Live Nation Entertainment was the largest producer, marketer, and seller of live concerts globally, controlling more than 75 concert venues in the United States, including most of the main amphitheaters and managed hundreds of the top artists including Miley Cyrus and Willie Nelson. Ticketmaster was the leading live entertainment ticketing and marketing company, controlling 80 percent of the market. The two companies merged in 2010 under Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. after the signing of a 10-year consent decree with the Department of Justice, which barred the company from threatening to withhold concerts from venues that do not sign with…

March 26

Antitrust

DOJ and USPS Award First-Ever $1 Million Antitrust Whistleblower Reward

DOJ Announces First-Ever $1 Million Antitrust Whistleblower Reward On January 29, 2026, the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) announced the first-ever $1 million reward to a whistleblower in an antitrust matter. The whistleblower provided key information to the DOJ that resulted in the resolution of criminal antitrust and fraud charges against EBLOCK Corporation (“EBlock” or the “Company”), a digital auction platform for used vehicles. This resolution…

February 19

Antitrust

What the Google Antitrust Ruling Means for the Future of Tech Competition and Private Enforcement

The September 2, 2025 decision in United States et al. v. Google marks a pivotal moment in U.S. antitrust enforcement against domineering technology companies. After finding in August 2024 that Google illegally maintained monopolies in general search and search text advertising, Judge Amit Mehta of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia opted for an array of behavioral remedies rather than a breakup—softening the blow on what could have been a crippling order for the tech giant. What Did the Court Decide in the…

February 05

Antitrust

Google Antitrust Lawsuit Forces Google to Face Consumer Claims Over Search Dominance

What did the judge decide, and what is the Google antitrust lawsuit alleging? On Wednesday, January 21st, Judge Rita Lin decided that the plaintiffs in the case against Google had sufficient evidence to move forward. The plaintiffs allege that Google violated federal antitrust laws by making and maintaining contracts with mobile device manufacturers and sellers as well as browser developers to make Google the default browser. The plaintiffs allege that this created a monopoly which harmed them by hindering…

January 07

Antitrust

The Future of Antitrust Laws: Trends and Predictions

Current Developments in DOJ Antitrust Actions Over the past two years, the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) Antitrust Division has pursued an aggressive enforcement agenda, targeting monopolistic behavior, algorithmic coordination, and anti-competitive mergers across sectors with a primary interest in regulating the technology industry. In April 2025, the DOJ secured a landmark victory in its ad-tech monopolization case against Google, with the court ruling that Google illegally monopolized publisher ad servers and ad exchanges, thereby harming online publishers and advertisers. The ruling represents one of the first high-profile…

January 05

Antitrust, International Business & Trade

Meta Wins Major Antitrust Case

On Tuesday, November 18, a federal judge ruled that Meta (formerly Facebook) did not engage in prohibited anticompetitive behavior by purchasing Instagram and WhatsApp. This case was initially launched in 2020 as part of a series of efforts by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to break up tech giants including Meta, Google, Amazon, and Apple. This article will examine how this recent ruling affects the prospects of future antitrust cases, as well as the rules and regulations underpinning…

October 13

Antitrust

Nvidia Antitrust Violation Finding in China Signals Rising Global Enforcement Risks

On September 15, 2025, China’s State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) issued a preliminary finding that NVIDIA, one of the world’s largest technology companies, violated China’s Anti-Monopoly Law of 2008 (AML) in relation to its $6.9 billion acquisition of Mellanox Technologies (Mellanox) in 2020. SAMR had previously approved that transaction, imposing behavioral conditions to prevent NVIDIA from using Mellanox’s high-performance networking products, namely InfiniBand technology, to foreclose competition with Chinese…

September 29

Antitrust

DOJ Antitrust Chief Rejects Old Frameworks—Opening the Door for Stronger Enforcement and Private Challenges

In a late-August commencement speech given at the Ohio State University Law School, Gail Slater, the Assistant Attorney General for the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Antitrust Division, laid out the groundwork for a nascent antitrust enforcement initiative: “Comply with Care.” To expedite and administer penalties to entities in violation of antitrust law, “Comply with Care” establishes a task force within the Antitrust Division. According to Slater, the “Comply with Care”…

July 07

Antitrust

FTC Antitrust Enforcement Blocks Anticompetitive Coordination in Global Advertising Merger

On June 25, 2025, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) approved a merger between two of the largest advertising agencies, Omnicom and Interpublic, contingent upon their compliance with a proposed order. This antitrust enforcement order will “prevent Omnicom from engaging in collusion or coordination to direct advertising away from media publishers based on the publishers’ political or ideological viewpoints” (article). Omnicom and Interpublic are two out of six major global advertising…

May 27

Antitrust

Athletes Await Final Approval of $2.8 Billion NCAA Antitrust Settlement

In one of the most consequential moments in college sports history, a federal judge in the Northern District of California, has declined final approval to a $2.8 billion antitrust settlement between the NCAA, its major conferences, and thousands of current and former Division I athletes. In October of 2024, Judge Wilken, preliminarily approved the settlement – a deal that would have ended a years-long legal battle over athlete compensation and…

While this website provides general information, it does not constitute legal advice. The best way to get guidance on your specific legal issue is to contact a lawyer. To schedule a meeting with an attorney, please call 866-540-5505 or complete the intake form to email us. To inquire about employment opportunities with Miller Shah LLP, please see our Opportunities page.

Offices Throughout
the United States & Italy

Get Fort Lauderdale Directions

IT Milan

Fax number

866-540-5505

Telephone

Attorney Advertising. This information is designed for general information only. The information presented should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship. Past results and testimonials are not a guarantee, warranty, or prediction of the outcome of your case, and should not be construed as such. Past results cannot guarantee future performance. Any result in a single case is not meant to create an expectation of similar results in future matters because each case involves many different factors, therefore, results will differ on a case-by-case basis. By providing contact information, users acknowledge and give explicit consent to be contacted via the methods of communication provided, including SMS. Message and data rates may apply. Message frequency may vary. Reply STOP to opt out.