CFM Local 10-208 on the Live Nation Monopoly and Streaming Injustice

Karen Suarez-Flint, secretary-treasurer of the Chicago Federation of Musicians Local 10-208, joined the America's Work Force Union Podcast to pull back the curtain on an industry that generates billions of dollars while the working musicians at its foundation earn fractions of pennies.

Suarez-Flint discussed the jury verdict finding Live Nation's merger with Ticketmaster an illegal monopoly, streaming royalty rates that effectively round to zero and the American Music Fairness Act.

• A jury found on all counts that the Live Nation-Ticketmaster merger constitutes an illegal monopoly. A federal settlement requiring divestiture of just 13 venues out of 394 globally was widely criticized, and approximately 34 state attorneys general moved to continue litigation independently. While the judge’s final ruling is still pending, the ruling may be one of the most significant antitrust victories in U.S. history.
• Spotify generated approximately $19 billion in revenue in a recent year; the royalty rate paid per stream is $0.003, which flows first to the music's owner, typically the record label, not the artist, before any portion reaches the musician. Suarez-Flint described the effective artist payment as rounding to zero, and noted that streaming algorithms can be gamed to suppress music unless artists accept an even lower rate.
• The American Music Fairness Act has bipartisan support and recently cleared the House Judiciary Committee. It would require radio broadcasters to pay musicians for airplay, a standard observed in virtually every developed country except the United States, Iran, China and North Korea. Suarez-Flint is calling on listeners to contact their legislators in support.

The Music Industry Has a Problem Most People Don't Know About

When the conversation about Live Nation and Ticketmaster makes the news, it almost always starts and ends with ticket prices. Fees are too high. Concerts are too expensive. Suarez-Flint acknowledges all of that is true, but she argued that ticket prices are just the cherry on top of a far more comprehensive problem involving the systematic extraction of wealth from the working musicians who make the entire industry possible.

Suarez-Flint came to this issue the way many people do, she said, by accident. A classically trained horn player, she reached out to a musician in her union to learn more about the independent music scene, expecting to discuss streaming. What she walked away understanding was something far more comprehensive and far more alarming. If someone embedded in the music world did not know the full picture, she reasoned, the average person almost certainly does not either.

The Live Nation Verdict and What It Actually Means

On April 15, a jury returned a verdict that Live Nation had violated the antitrust laws through the use of its monopoly power in the primary ticketing services market. Suarez-Flint talked about why understanding why that matters requires understanding how completely Live Nation controls the music ecosystem. She explained that when you buy a concert ticket, the price is typically divided among the artist, the venue, the ticketing company and the promoter. Suarez-Flint said that through various subsidiaries and acquisitions, Live Nation has positioned itself to capture all four. It owns venues. It holds a dominant share of the ticketing market. It provides management and promotional services to thousands of artists. And when you get to the venue, the food, the water and even the condiments trace back to Live Nation-affiliated ownership.

That last point, she noted, is not an exaggeration. It is a business structure with real consequences that reach well beyond what any individual consumer experiences at the box office.

The federal settlement following the verdict required Live Nation to divest from 13 venues out of 394 globally. Suarez-Flint called it a pathetic settlement. Approximately 34 state attorneys general agreed, concluding it fell far short of addressing the monopoly, and moved to pursue litigation independently, producing what she described as potentially one of the most significant antitrust victories in decades. The judge's final ruling on remedies is still pending.

Independent Venues, Chicago and the Ecosystem Under Threat

Chicago, Suarez-Flint said, offered a useful lens for understanding the independent music landscape outside Live Nation's orbit. The city's independent venues are woven into its neighborhoods rather than concentrated on a single entertainment strip. She cited a recent study by the Chicago Independent Venue League showing that only about 25 percent of those venues are currently profitable. The financial toll of the pandemic, combined with structural pressures from the market's dominant player, has left the independent ecosystem fragile.

One of the overlooked reasons for this problem, Suarez-Flint explained, is Live Nation's radius clause. The standard Live Nation radius clause prevents artists from performing within 100 miles of a Live Nation venue for six months following an appearance there. For independent venues trying to book talent, she said, that restriction can effectively lock them out of artists for an entire season. For artists, it forces longer travel distances between engagements and limits their ability to build local audiences. For fans, it reduces opportunities to see the acts they want, which in turn makes the rare Live Nation appearance feel worth paying any price to attend.

Suarez-Flint described presenting this clause to an Illinois state senator and someone from the state Attorney General's office on a recent call. Their reaction, she said, was disbelief. The clause exists, it is enforceable and most people have no idea.

Suarez-Flint’s response has been to build coalitions. She has been meeting with independent venue owners, reaching out to indie artists, engaging legislators and planning community town halls to bring these groups into the same room. Illinois is already working on non-compete legislation, and Suarez-Flint sees a real opportunity to carve out specific protections for musicians. A corporation should not be able to dictate where and when a non-employee can perform their craft, she argued.

Streaming and the Math That Does Not Add Up

The picture does not improve when the conversation shifts to streaming, according to Suarez-Flint. Spotify generated approximately $19 billion in revenue in a recent year. The per-stream royalty rate is $0.003 — less than a third of a penny. That fraction flows first to whoever owns the rights to the music, which in most cases is a record label rather than the artist who recorded it. Whatever portion eventually reaches the musician is a fraction of that already-fractional amount.

Suarez-Flint also described how streaming platforms have built algorithmic systems that can suppress an artist's visibility unless that artist agrees to accept an even lower royalty rate in exchange for algorithmic promotion. The choice facing many independent musicians, she said, is between earning almost nothing with decent visibility or earning even less in exchange for a chance at being heard at all.

She also pointed out that the United States is among a very small number of countries — alongside Iran, China and North Korea — that do not require radio broadcasters to pay musicians for airplay. The argument used by the radio industry, which controls hundreds of stations and generates billions in advertising revenue, is that it cannot afford to pay the people whose music it plays.

A Bill That Could Change Things

The American Music Fairness Act has cleared the House Judiciary Committee and has bipartisan support moving forward. It would require radio broadcasters to pay performance royalties to musicians, bringing the United States in line with the practices of nearly every other developed nation. Suarez-Flint acknowledged the opposition is well-funded, organized and deeply connected to the legislators needed to support the bill.

She asked anyone who loves music to contact their representatives and tell them to support the American Music Fairness Act. The independent venues, the working musicians and the local music ecosystems that make neighborhoods vibrant are all part of the same story — and Suarez-Flint said all of them can’t wait much longer for someone else to fix it.

More information on the Chicago Federation of Musicians is available at cfm10208.com.

Go Behind the Scenes of the Labor Movement

Every victory at the bargaining table starts with workers standing together. From the shop floor to the statehouse, hear how activists are fighting for better wages, safer conditions and a stronger future. Subscribe to the America's Work Force Union Podcast to get the latest interviews with the leaders and organizers building worker power across America.