A federal judge dismissed an antitrust lawsuit brought earlier this year by a group of consumers challenging the Paramount-Warner Bros. Discovery merger.
On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín ruled that the plaintiffs in the case did not establish standing. However, she did decide that the consumers would be allowed to file “an amended complaint.”
“Plaintiffs’ standing theory amounts to little more than the assertion that they are consumers who watch television and go to the movies, and therefore a merger between entertainment companies would injure them,” Martínez-Olguín wrote. “Plaintiffs cite to no authority establishing that the generalized asserted competitive harms constitute concrete harms that support standing, instead
simply relying on Spokeo and arguing that the monetary injury certain of them suffered by increased Paramount+ prices is sufficiently concrete to support standing for each of them and for both challenged mergers.”
Additionally, the judge stated the plaintiffs had only “one concrete and particularized injury.” Specifically, “a single, historical price increase on Paramount+.”
Martínez-Olguín ruled that this injury was “not suffered in the same way by all five of the plaintiffs.”
As we previously reported, Paramount Skydance was hit with a lawsuit in April from a group of subscribers of its streamer, who sued the company on antitrust grounds over the $110 billion deal.
In the lawsuit filed in California federal court, the plaintiffs alleged that the Paramount-Warner Bros. deal, if allowed to be completed, would strengthen “Paramount’s ability and incentive to raise prices, reduce output, narrow slates, reduce quality and worsen consumer-facing terms, including through control of distribution, exclusivity, windowing and licensing.”
At the time, a spokesperson from Paramount stood by the merger, telling TheWrap that the deal would “create a stronger competitor.”
Judge Martínez-Olguín is also presiding over the antitrust suit brought about by California Attorney General Rob Bonta and 11 other state attorneys general, as well as a challenge from the Writers Guild of America. A trial date for those legal battles was set on Tuesday, with Martínez-Olguín ruling that a 12-day trial would begin on March 2 and end on March 15.
Despite a corresponding ticking fee of $1.06 billion emerging due to the trial date, Paramount told TheWrap that the company respects the judge’s decision.
“The court has set a trial date for early March. We respect the court’s decision and continue to believe a trial on the merits is the best and most direct way for us to prove what we’ve said from the start – this transaction is lawful, pro-competitive, and raises no antitrust concerns,” a spokesperson told TheWrap. “The lawsuit against us has no basis in fact, economics or antitrust law. We will continue to vigorously defend the transaction and remain committed to closing as soon as possible so its benefits for the creative community and consumers can be realized.”
