🔗 Share this article

A court official has thrown out the rapper Drake’s defamation lawsuit targeting the music corporation concerning Kendrick Lamar’s track Not Like Us.

Presiding Judge the court’s judge decided that the rapper’s lyrics, which claimed Drake and his crew of being "certified paedophiles", were "protected opinion" and cannot be deemed defamatory.

The Canadian rapper submitted the lawsuit in January, accusing UMG, the record label representing the two rappers, of defamation by permitting the song to be released and promoted, saying it spread a "false and malicious narrative".

The artist’s representative said he planned to appeal the decision. UMG expressed it was satisfied with the result and was looking forward to continuing its collaboration with the rapper.

Background of the Rap Battle

The diss song, which was initially released in spring 2024, was widely seen as the decisive blow in an continuing feud between the rival rappers.

It has emerged as the biggest hit of Lamar's musical journey, having received five Grammys and being one of the most-discussed moments of his Super Bowl half-time show in February.

In a 38-page order, the judge called the row between the rappers "the most infamous rap battle 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 Drake is a child predator is certainly a grave allegation, the wider backdrop of a intense musical rivalry, with incendiary language and insulting claims exchanged by both participants, would not lead the reasonable listener to believe that 'the track' conveys verifiable facts about plaintiff."

She also noted that, in an earlier song, Drake had "challenged his rival to make the paedophilia accusations" that appeared in Not Like Us.

On the track his own release, Drake used the synthetic vocals of the late rapper to give Lamar advice on how to win the rap battle.

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

"Against this backdrop in which such lyrics as 'Hey Drake, I’ve heard you prefer them young' must be evaluated," wrote the court.

"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 Drake Graham, did not name Lamar in the lawsuit.

His lawyers alleged the label of initiating "a campaign to create a viral hit" out of a track that made the "false factual allegation that Drake is a criminal paedophile, and to suggest that the public should turn to extra-legal action in retaliation".

Ruling against Drake, Judge Vargas said fans would not expect "truthful accounts" from a diss track "filled with vulgar language, insults, violent implications, and exaggerated statements."

She highlighted that the rapper himself had engaged in comparable rhetoric, referencing a line in which the star "strongly" suggested that "Lamar is a domestic abuser", and another where he "raps that he 'heard' that one of Lamar's sons may not be biologically his."

Concerning Lamar's song, the court said: "Although apparent statements of fact may take on the nature of subjective views... when made in open discourse, intense arguments, or other circumstances in which an listener may anticipate the use of epithets, fiery rhetoric or exaggeration."

Reacting to the dismissal, a UMG representative said: "From the outset, this lawsuit was an affront to all artists and their artistic freedom and never should have seen the light of day."

"We are satisfied with the judge’s ruling and are eager to continuing our partnership effectively promoting the artist’s work and supporting his career," the spokesperson continued.

A representative for Drake said the rapper planned to appeal the decision, "and we look forward to the Court of Appeals reviewing it".

Lamar has not yet comment on the case.