🔗 Share this article

A judge has thrown out the rapper Drake’s legal claim targeting the music corporation over Kendrick Lamar’s song Not Like Us.

Judge Jeannette Vargas determined that Lamar's song lyrics, which claimed the artist and his associates of being "pedophiles", were "nonactionable opinion" and could not be deemed libelous.

The Canadian rapper filed the lawsuit in January, accusing Universal Music Group, the music company representing the two rappers, of defamatory conduct by allowing the track to be published and promoted, stating it disseminated a "false and malicious narrative".

The artist’s representative said he intended to appeal the decision. UMG expressed it was pleased with the result and was looking forward to resuming its work with the rapper.

Context of the Rap Battle

The diss song, which was initially released in May 2024, was widely seen as the final strike in an continuing feud between the rival rappers.

It has become the biggest hit of Lamar's musical journey, having won five Grammys and being one of the most-talked about moments of his Super Bowl half-time show in February.

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

"Both rappers’ series of diss tracks was a 'verbal conflict' that was the subject of extensive press coverage and online discourse," the court wrote.

"Although the claim that plaintiff is a child predator is certainly a serious one, the wider backdrop of a heated rap battle, with provocative remarks and offensive accusations hurled by each artist, would not lead the reasonable listener to believe that 'Not Like Us' imparts verifiable facts about the claimant."

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

On the song his own release, the rapper 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.

"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 wording strongly indicates that this lyric is a direct callback to Drake's lyrics in the earlier release."

'An Affront to Artists'

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

His lawyers alleged the label of launching "a campaign to generate a popular song" out of a release that made the "false factual allegation that the artist is a convicted predator, and to imply that the public should resort to vigilante justice in retaliation".

Deciding against the plaintiff, the judge said listeners would not expect "truthful accounts" from a musical attack "replete with profanity, trash-talking, threats of violence, and exaggerated statements."

She highlighted that Drake himself had used comparable rhetoric, referencing a line in which the artist "strongly" implied that "his opponent is a domestic abuser", and another where he "claims that he 'heard' that one of his rival’s sons may not be biologically his."

Concerning Lamar's song, Judge Vargas said: "Even seemingly factual claims may assume the character 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 hyperbole."

Reacting to the dismissal, a UMG representative said: "From the beginning, this case was an insult to every creative and their artistic freedom and never should have seen the light of day."

"We're pleased with the court's dismissal and are eager to continuing our partnership successfully marketing the artist’s work and investing in his career," the representative continued.

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

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