🔗 Share this article

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

Judge the court’s judge ruled that the rapper’s song lyrics, which claimed the artist and his crew of being "pedophiles", were "nonactionable opinion" and cannot be considered libelous.

Drake filed the legal action in early this year, accusing UMG, the record label representing both artists, of defamatory conduct by allowing the track to be published and promoted, stating it disseminated a "false and malicious narrative".

The artist’s representative said he intended to challenge the ruling. UMG expressed it was pleased with the outcome and was eager to resuming its collaboration with the rapper.

Context of the Rap Battle

Not Like Us, which was first dropped in spring 2024, was broadly viewed as the final strike in an ongoing battle between the rival rappers.

It has become the biggest hit of the rapper’s musical journey, having won multiple Grammy awards and being one of the most-talked about highlights of his Super Bowl half-time show in February.

In a detailed ruling, Judge Vargas called the dispute between the rappers "the most notorious hip-hop feud in the genre's history".

"The artists' series of diss tracks was a 'verbal conflict' that was the subject of substantial media scrutiny and digital debate," the court wrote.

"Although the accusation that Drake is a child predator is undoubtedly a grave allegation, the broader context of a intense musical rivalry, with provocative remarks and offensive accusations hurled by each artist, would not incline the average audience to believe that 'Not Like Us' conveys truthful statements about the claimant."

She additionally observed that, in an previous track, Drake had "challenged his rival to make the pedophile claims" that appeared in the diss record.

On the song Taylor Made Freestyle, the rapper used the AI-generated voice of Tupac Shakur to give Lamar advice on how to win the rap battle.

"Suggest he has a preference for minors, consider that a tip," the song suggested.

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

"The similarity in the phrasing suggests strongly that this lyric is a direct callback to Drake's lyrics in the prior song."

'An Affront to Artists'

Drake, whose legal name is Aubrey Drake Graham, did not sue Lamar in the lawsuit.

His lawyers accused the label of launching "a campaign to create a viral hit" out of a release that made the "false factual allegation that the artist is a criminal paedophile, and to suggest that the public should resort to extra-legal action in retaliation".

Ruling against the plaintiff, Judge Vargas said fans would not expect "truthful accounts" from a diss track "replete with vulgar language, insults, threats of violence, and exaggerated statements."

She pointed out that Drake himself had used similar language, quoting a lyric in which the artist "heavily" suggested that "his opponent is a spouse beater", and another where he "raps that he 'was told' that one of Lamar's children may not be his biological offspring."

Regarding Lamar's song, the court said: "Even apparent statements of fact may assume the character of subjective views... when made in public debate, heated labour dispute, or similar situations in which an listener may anticipate the use of epithets, passionate language or exaggeration."

Reacting to the dismissal, a UMG representative said: "From the outset, this case was an affront to every creative and their creative expression and should not have been filed."

"We are satisfied with the court's dismissal and are eager to continuing our partnership effectively marketing the artist’s work and investing in his artistic path," the representative continued.

A representative for Drake said the artist planned to appeal the ruling, "and we look forward to the appellate court reviewing it".

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