🔗 Share this article

A judge has dismissed Drake's legal claim targeting the music corporation over Kendrick Lamar's track the diss record.

Judge Jeannette Vargas decided that Lamar's lyrics, which accused the artist and his associates of being "pedophiles", were "protected opinion" and cannot be deemed defamatory.

Drake filed the legal action in early this year, accusing Universal Music Group, the music company behind the two rappers, of defamatory conduct by permitting the song to be released and promoted, stating it disseminated a "false and malicious narrative".

Drake's spokesperson stated he intended to appeal the decision. Universal Music Group expressed it was satisfied with the outcome and was eager to continuing its collaboration with the musician.

Background of the Hip-Hop Feud

The diss song, which was initially released in spring 2024, was broadly viewed as the final strike in an continuing feud between the competing artists.

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

In a detailed ruling, the judge called the dispute between the artists "the most infamous rap battle in the genre's history".

"The artists' seven-track rap battle was a 'verbal conflict' that was the focus of substantial media scrutiny and digital debate," the court wrote.

"Although the accusation that plaintiff is a child predator is undoubtedly a serious one, the wider backdrop of a intense musical rivalry, with incendiary language and insulting claims hurled by each artist, would not incline the average audience to believe that 'Not Like Us' imparts truthful statements about the claimant."

She also noted that, in an previous track, the artist had "challenged his rival to make the pedophile claims" that appeared in Not Like Us.

On the track his own release, the rapper used the synthetic vocals of the late rapper to give Lamar advice on how to prevail in the feud.

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

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

"The parallel in the phrasing suggests strongly that this lyric is a clear reference to the artist’s own words in the prior song."

'An Affront to Artists'

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

His lawyers alleged UMG of initiating "a campaign to generate a popular song" out of a release that made the "untrue claim that Drake is a criminal paedophile, and to imply that the audience should resort to vigilante justice in retaliation".

Ruling against the plaintiff, Judge Vargas said listeners would not expect "truthful accounts" from a musical attack "filled with vulgar language, insults, threats of violence, and exaggerated statements."

She pointed out that the rapper himself had engaged in comparable rhetoric, referencing a lyric in which the star "heavily" suggested that "his opponent is a domestic abuser", and a separate instance where he "raps that he 'was told' that one of his rival’s children may not be his biological offspring."

Concerning the track in question, Judge Vargas said: "Even seemingly factual claims may take on the nature of subjective views... when made in public debate, heated labour dispute, or other circumstances in which an audience may expect the use of slurs, passionate language or exaggeration."

Reacting to the rejection, a UMG representative said: "From the beginning, this case was an insult to every creative and their creative expression and never should have been filed."

"We're pleased with the judge’s ruling and look forward to resuming our partnership successfully marketing the artist’s work and investing in his artistic path," the representative added.

A representative for Drake said the rapper planned to appeal the decision, "and we await the appellate court reviewing it".

Lamar has yet to comment on the case.