🔗 Share this article

A judge has thrown out Drake's defamation lawsuit targeting Universal Music Group over Kendrick Lamar's track Not Like Us.

Presiding Judge Jeannette Vargas determined that Lamar's lyrics, which accused the artist and his crew of being "certified paedophiles", were "protected opinion" and cannot be considered defamatory.

Drake submitted the legal action in January, claiming Universal Music Group, the music company behind both artists, of defamation by permitting the track to be published and marketed, stating it disseminated a "false and malicious narrative".

Drake's representative said he planned to challenge the decision. Universal Music Group expressed it was pleased with the result and was looking forward to resuming its work with the musician.

Context of the Rap Battle

Not Like Us, which was first dropped in spring 2024, was widely seen as the final strike in an ongoing battle between the competing artists.

It has become the biggest hit of the rapper’s career, having won multiple Grammy awards and being one of the most-talked about moments of his Super Bowl performance in February.

In a detailed ruling, the judge called the dispute between the rappers "the most notorious hip-hop feud in the history of rap music".

"The artists' series of diss tracks was a 'verbal conflict' that was the subject of extensive press coverage and digital debate," the judge wrote.

"Although the claim that plaintiff is a pedophile is certainly a serious one, the broader context of a intense musical rivalry, with provocative remarks and offensive accusations hurled by both participants, would not incline the average audience to believe that 'Not Like Us' imparts verifiable facts about plaintiff."

She additionally observed that, in an previous track, Drake had "dared his rival to make the paedophilia accusations" that featured in the diss record.

On the track his own release, Drake used the AI-generated voice of the late rapper to suggest strategies on how to win the rap battle.

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

"Against this backdrop in which such lyrics as 'Say, Drake, I hear you like 'em young' must be evaluated," stated Judge Vargas.

"The similarity in the wording strongly indicates that this lyric is a clear reference 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 legal filing.

His lawyers alleged UMG of launching "an effort to generate a viral hit" out of a release that made the "false factual allegation that the artist is a convicted predator, and to suggest that the public should resort to vigilante justice in retaliation".

Deciding against Drake, the judge said fans would not expect "accurate factual reporting" from a diss track "filled with vulgar language, insults, violent implications, and exaggerated statements."

She pointed out that the rapper himself had used comparable rhetoric, referencing a lyric in which the artist "strongly" suggested that "his opponent is a domestic abuser", and another where he "claims that he 'was told' that one of his rival’s sons may not be biologically his."

Regarding Lamar's song, Judge Vargas said: "Although apparent statements of fact may take on the nature of subjective views... when made in public debate, intense arguments, or similar situations in which an audience may anticipate the use of slurs, passionate language or exaggeration."

Responding to the dismissal, a label spokesperson said: "From the outset, this case was an affront to every creative and their artistic freedom and never should have been filed."

"We're pleased with the court's dismissal and look forward to continuing our work effectively marketing Drake's music and investing in his career," the spokesperson added.

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

Kendrick Lamar has not yet comment on the legal matter.