Live Nation can continue selling tickets for event originally marketed as Coachella Day One 22'

Earlier this month, a judge granted a restraining order in response to Goldenvoice and Coachella's trademark infringement lawsuit against Live Nation, as the event, separate to the annual Coachella festival, was originally marketed as Coachella Day One 22', and was set to be held at the Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians of California Coachella Crossroads event venue.

Just days ahead of the event, now titled Day One 22', a judge has ruled that Live Nation can proceed with selling tickets for the New Year's Eve event, which is expected to include performances from Lil Wayne, E-40, Getter, DJ Diesel and more.

According to Variety, the latest ruling allowing ticket sales to continue happened on Monday (27 December), and judge R. Gary Klausner stated in his ruling that plaintiffs had "ask(ed) the court to prevent Live Nation from selling tickets to Twenty-Nine Palms' December 31 event, irrespective of the way that Live Nation promotes the event on Ticketmaster.com."

He added that it was "no surprise" that the tribe had not stopped any "allegedly infringing behavior" since the tribe was not named in the lawsuit or restraining order.

Darrell Mike, chairman of the Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians said in a statement that the ruling "is a win for the Tribe, the community and our ticketing partners at Live Nation. As a community and nation who reside in Coachella, California, we are equally thrilled that our outdoor venue, Coachella Crossroads, will be able to continue operation under its given name. The strong-arming of Goldenvoice and its parent company AEG to take reign over a name of a region and businesses who choose to identify with it is disrespectful to small and large business operations, those under their employ and the indigenous people who live within the valley."

In the original complaint, Goldenvoice asked the court to be awarded damages for infringement and for unfair competition, arguing that the defendants were "intentionally trading on the goodwill of" the Coachella festival name by promoting "a directly competitive live music event" and copying the style of the Coachella festival’s imaging.