🔗 Share this article

A court official has rejected Drake's defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group concerning Kendrick Lamar's track the diss record.

Presiding Judge Jeannette Vargas ruled that the rapper’s lyrics, which claimed 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 Universal Music Group, the music company behind both artists, of defamatory conduct by permitting the song to be published and marketed, saying it spread a "false and malicious narrative".

Drake's spokesperson stated he intended to appeal the ruling. UMG expressed it was pleased with the outcome and was looking forward to continuing its collaboration with the rapper.

Context of the Hip-Hop Feud

Not Like Us, which was first dropped in May 2024, was broadly viewed as the decisive blow in an ongoing battle between the rival rappers.

It has become the biggest hit of Lamar's musical journey, having received five Grammys and being one of the most-discussed highlights of his Super Bowl performance in early 2025.

In a 38-page order, the judge called the row between the rappers "the most infamous rap battle 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 accusation that plaintiff is a pedophile is certainly a serious one, the wider backdrop of a intense musical rivalry, with incendiary language and offensive accusations hurled by both participants, would not lead the reasonable listener to believe that 'Not Like Us' imparts verifiable facts about plaintiff."

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

On the song Taylor Made Freestyle, Drake used the AI-generated voice of Tupac Shakur to suggest strategies 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 lyrics as 'Hey Drake, I’ve heard you prefer them young' must be assessed," wrote the court.

"The parallel in the phrasing suggests strongly that this line is a clear reference to Drake's lyrics in the earlier release."

'An Affront to Artists'

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

His legal team accused the label of launching "a campaign to generate a viral hit" out of a track that made the "untrue claim that the artist is a criminal paedophile, and to suggest that the audience should turn to extra-legal action in response".

Ruling against the plaintiff, Judge Vargas said listeners would not expect "accurate factual reporting" from a diss track "replete with profanity, trash-talking, violent implications, and exaggerated statements."

She highlighted that Drake himself had engaged in comparable rhetoric, quoting a lyric in which the artist "heavily" implied that "his opponent 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, the court said: "Although seemingly factual claims may take on the nature of statements of opinion... when made in open discourse, intense arguments, or other circumstances in which an listener may anticipate the use of epithets, passionate language or exaggeration."

Reacting to the dismissal, a label spokesperson said: "From the beginning, this case was an affront to all artists and their artistic freedom and never should have seen the light of day."

"We are satisfied with the court's dismissal and are eager to resuming our partnership successfully marketing the artist’s work and supporting his artistic path," the spokesperson continued.

A spokesperson for Drake said the artist planned to appeal the ruling, "and we await the Court of Appeals examining it".

Lamar has yet to comment on the legal matter.