🔗 Share this article

A judge has thrown out Drake's legal claim targeting the music corporation over Kendrick Lamar’s track the diss record.

Presiding Judge Jeannette Vargas decided that Lamar's lyrics, which claimed the artist and his associates of being "pedophiles", were "nonactionable opinion" and could not be deemed libelous.

The Canadian rapper filed the lawsuit in early this year, claiming UMG, the music company representing both artists, of defamation by allowing the song to be published and promoted, saying it spread a "false and malicious narrative".

The artist’s spokesperson said he intended to appeal the decision. Universal Music Group said it was pleased with the outcome and was looking forward to continuing its collaboration with the rapper.

Context of the Rap Battle

Not Like Us, which was initially released in spring 2024, was widely seen as the decisive blow in an ongoing battle between the competing artists.

It has emerged as the most successful track of the rapper’s musical journey, having won five Grammys and being one of the most-discussed highlights of his Super Bowl half-time show in February.

In a detailed ruling, the judge called the dispute between the rappers "the most infamous rap battle in the history of rap music".

"Both rappers’ series of diss tracks was a 'verbal conflict' that was the focus of substantial media scrutiny and digital debate," the court noted.

"Although the claim that Drake is a pedophile is certainly a grave allegation, the wider backdrop of a intense musical rivalry, with incendiary language and insulting claims hurled by both participants, would not incline the reasonable listener to believe that 'Not Like Us' imparts truthful statements about plaintiff."

She also noted that, in an previous track, Drake had "dared Lamar to make the paedophilia accusations" that featured in Not Like Us.

On the song Taylor Made Freestyle, Drake used the synthetic vocals of the late rapper to suggest strategies on how to prevail in the feud.

"Talk about him likin' young girls, that's a gift from me," the track proposed.

"It is in this context in which such lyrics as 'Hey Drake, I’ve heard you prefer them young' must be evaluated," stated Judge Vargas.

"The similarity in the wording strongly indicates that this line is a clear reference to the artist’s own words in the earlier release."

'An Affront to Artists'

Drake, whose legal name is Aubrey Graham, did not sue his rival in the legal filing.

His legal team alleged the label of launching "an effort to create a viral hit" out of a track that made the "false factual allegation that the artist is a convicted predator, and to imply that the public should resort to extra-legal action in response".

Deciding against Drake, Judge Vargas said fans would not expect "accurate factual reporting" from a musical attack "filled with profanity, trash-talking, violent implications, and figurative and hyperbolic language."

She highlighted that the rapper himself had engaged in similar language, referencing a lyric in which the star "strongly" suggested that "his opponent is a domestic abuser", and a separate instance where Drake "raps that he 'was told' that one of Lamar's sons may not be his biological offspring."

Regarding the track in question, the court said: "Even seemingly factual claims may take on the nature of statements of opinion... when made in open discourse, heated labour dispute, or similar situations in which an audience may expect the use of epithets, fiery rhetoric or hyperbole."

Responding to the dismissal, a label spokesperson said: "From the beginning, this case was an affront to every creative and their artistic freedom and should not have seen the light of day."

"We're pleased with the court's dismissal and are eager to continuing our partnership successfully promoting Drake's music and investing in his artistic path," the spokesperson added.

A spokesperson for the musician said the artist intended to contest the decision, "and we look forward to the appellate court examining it".

Lamar has not yet issue a statement on the legal matter.