🔗 Share this article

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

Judge the court’s judge determined that the rapper’s song lyrics, which accused the artist and his crew of being "certified paedophiles", were "nonactionable opinion" and could not be deemed libelous.

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

Drake's representative stated he intended to challenge the decision. Universal Music Group said it was pleased with the result and was looking forward to continuing its collaboration with the rapper.

Background of the Rap Battle

The diss song, which was first dropped in spring 2024, was widely seen as the final strike in an ongoing battle between the rival rappers.

It has emerged as the most successful track of Lamar's musical journey, having won multiple Grammy awards and being one of the most-discussed moments of his Super Bowl performance in early 2025.

In a 38-page order, the judge called the dispute between the rappers "the most notorious hip-hop feud in the history of rap music".

"Both rappers’ series of diss tracks was a 'verbal conflict' that was the focus of substantial media scrutiny and digital debate," the judge wrote.

"While the claim that plaintiff is a child predator is certainly a grave allegation, the wider backdrop of a intense musical rivalry, with provocative remarks and insulting claims hurled by both participants, would not incline the average audience to believe that 'Not Like Us' imparts truthful statements about the claimant."

She also noted that, in an earlier song, the artist had "challenged Lamar to make the pedophile claims" that featured in Not Like Us.

On the song his own release, the rapper 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 track proposed.

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

"The similarity in the phrasing suggests strongly that this line is a clear reference to Drake's lyrics in the prior song."

'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 initiating "a campaign to create a viral hit" out of a release that made the "false factual allegation that Drake is a convicted predator, and to suggest that the audience should turn to vigilante justice in response".

Deciding against Drake, Judge Vargas said listeners would not expect "truthful accounts" from a musical attack "replete with vulgar language, trash-talking, threats of violence, and figurative and hyperbolic language."

She highlighted that the rapper himself had engaged in comparable rhetoric, referencing a line in which the star "strongly" implied that "Lamar is a spouse beater", and a separate instance where Drake "raps that he 'heard' that one of his rival’s children may not be biologically his."

Regarding the track in question, the court said: "Although apparent statements of fact may assume the character of subjective views... when made in open discourse, heated labour dispute, or similar situations in which an audience may expect the use of slurs, fiery rhetoric or exaggeration."

Reacting to the dismissal, a UMG spokesperson said: "From the beginning, this case was an affront to all artists and their creative expression and should not have been filed."

"We are satisfied with the judge’s ruling and are eager to continuing our work successfully promoting Drake's music and investing in his career," the spokesperson added.

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

Kendrick Lamar has yet to issue a statement on the case.