🔗 Share this article

A court official has thrown out Drake's legal claim targeting Universal Music Group concerning Kendrick Lamar's track the diss record.

Presiding Judge the court’s judge ruled that the rapper’s song lyrics, which claimed Drake and his crew of being "certified paedophiles", were "nonactionable opinion" and cannot be considered libelous.

Drake submitted the lawsuit in January, accusing UMG, the record label representing both artists, of defamatory conduct by allowing the track to be published and marketed, stating it spread a "untrue and harmful story".

The artist’s representative said he planned to appeal the decision. UMG said it was pleased with the outcome and was looking forward to continuing its work with the musician.

Background of the Rap Battle

The diss song, which was initially released in May 2024, was widely seen as the decisive blow in an ongoing battle between the competing artists.

It has become the biggest hit of the rapper’s career, having received multiple Grammy awards and being one of the most-discussed moments of his Super Bowl half-time show in early 2025.

In a 38-page order, the judge called the dispute between the rappers "the most notorious hip-hop feud in the genre's history".

"The artists' series of diss tracks was a 'war of words' that was the subject of substantial media scrutiny and online discourse," the court wrote.

"Although the claim that plaintiff is a pedophile is undoubtedly a serious one, the wider backdrop of a heated rap battle, with provocative remarks and insulting claims exchanged by each artist, would not lead the average audience to believe that 'the track' conveys verifiable facts about the claimant."

She additionally observed that, in an previous track, Drake had "challenged Lamar to make the pedophile claims" that featured in Not Like Us.

On the song his own release, Drake used the AI-generated voice of Tupac Shakur to give Lamar advice on how to win the rap battle.

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

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

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

'A Slap in the Face to Creatives'

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

His legal team accused the label of initiating "an effort to generate a popular song" out of a release that made the "false factual allegation that the artist is a convicted predator, and to suggest that the audience should resort to extra-legal action in retaliation".

Ruling against the plaintiff, Judge Vargas said fans would not expect "truthful accounts" from a musical attack "replete with profanity, insults, threats of violence, and figurative and hyperbolic language."

She pointed out that Drake himself had used similar language, referencing a line in which the artist "heavily" implied that "his opponent is a spouse beater", and a separate instance where Drake "claims that he 'heard' that one of his rival’s sons may not be biologically his."

Regarding Lamar's song, Judge Vargas said: "Although seemingly factual claims may take on the nature of statements of opinion... when made in open discourse, heated labour dispute, or other circumstances in which an audience may anticipate the use of epithets, passionate language or hyperbole."

Reacting to the dismissal, a label spokesperson said: "From the beginning, this case was an insult to all artists and their artistic freedom and should not have seen the light of day."

"We're pleased with the court's dismissal and look forward to continuing our work successfully marketing Drake's music and supporting his career," the representative added.

A spokesperson for the musician said the rapper planned to appeal the decision, "and we look forward to the appellate court reviewing it".

Lamar has yet to issue a statement on the case.