🔗 Share this article

A court official has rejected Drake's legal claim targeting Universal Music Group concerning Kendrick Lamar's track the diss record.

Presiding Judge Jeannette Vargas ruled that Lamar's lyrics, which accused Drake and his associates of being "pedophiles", were "nonactionable opinion" and cannot be considered libelous.

The Canadian rapper submitted the legal action in early this year, accusing UMG, the record label behind both artists, of defamation by allowing the track to be released and marketed, stating it spread a "false and malicious narrative".

Drake's representative said he planned to challenge the ruling. Universal Music Group expressed it was satisfied with the result and was eager to resuming its collaboration with the musician.

Context of the Rap Battle

The diss song, which was first dropped in May 2024, was broadly viewed as the decisive blow in an continuing feud between the rival rappers.

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

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

"Both rappers’ series of diss tracks was a 'war of words' that was the subject of substantial media scrutiny and digital debate," the court wrote.

"Although the accusation that plaintiff is a child predator is certainly a serious one, the wider backdrop of a intense musical rivalry, with incendiary language and offensive accusations hurled by each artist, would not lead the reasonable listener 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 paedophilia accusations" that featured in Not Like Us.

On the track his own release, the rapper used the synthetic vocals 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 proposed.

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

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

'An Affront to Artists'

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

His legal team alleged UMG of launching "an effort to create a popular song" out of a track that made the "untrue claim that the artist is a criminal paedophile, and to suggest that the audience should resort to extra-legal action in response".

Deciding against Drake, the judge said fans would not expect "truthful accounts" from a musical attack "replete with vulgar language, trash-talking, violent implications, and exaggerated statements."

She highlighted that the rapper himself had engaged in similar language, referencing a line in which the artist "heavily" implied that "Lamar is a domestic abuser", and a separate instance where he "claims that he 'heard' that one of Lamar's sons may not be his biological offspring."

Concerning Lamar's song, Judge Vargas said: "Even apparent statements of fact may assume the character of subjective views... when made in public debate, intense arguments, or similar situations in which an listener may expect the use of epithets, fiery rhetoric or hyperbole."

Responding to the dismissal, a label representative said: "From the outset, this lawsuit was an affront to every creative and their creative expression and never should have seen the light of day."

"We are satisfied with the court's dismissal and look forward to resuming our work effectively promoting 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 await the appellate court reviewing it".

Lamar has yet to issue a statement on the legal matter.