🔗 Share this article

A judge has thrown out Drake's defamation lawsuit targeting the music corporation over Kendrick Lamar's track Not Like Us.

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

The Canadian rapper filed the lawsuit in early this year, claiming UMG, the music company representing both artists, of defamation by allowing the track to be released and promoted, stating it disseminated a "untrue and harmful story".

Drake's spokesperson said he planned to challenge the decision. Universal Music Group said it was satisfied with the outcome and was looking forward to continuing its collaboration with the musician.

Context of the Hip-Hop Feud

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

It has become the biggest hit of the rapper’s career, having won multiple Grammy awards and being one of the most-discussed highlights of his Super Bowl performance in February.

In a 38-page order, the judge called the row between the rappers "the most infamous rap battle in the genre's history".

"The artists' seven-track rap battle was a 'war of words' that was the subject of substantial media scrutiny and digital debate," the court noted.

"While the accusation that plaintiff is a child predator is undoubtedly a serious one, the wider backdrop of a heated rap battle, with provocative remarks and offensive accusations exchanged by each artist, would not incline the reasonable listener to believe that 'Not Like Us' conveys truthful statements about plaintiff."

She additionally observed that, in an earlier song, Drake had "dared Lamar to make the paedophilia accusations" that featured in Not Like Us.

On the song Taylor Made Freestyle, the rapper used the synthetic vocals 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 track suggested.

"It is in this context in which such lines as 'Hey Drake, I’ve heard you prefer them young' must be evaluated," stated the court.

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

'An Affront to Artists'

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

His lawyers accused the label of launching "a campaign to create a viral hit" out of a track that made the "untrue claim that the artist is a criminal paedophile, and to suggest that the public should resort to vigilante justice in retaliation".

Deciding against the plaintiff, Judge Vargas said fans would not expect "truthful accounts" from a diss track "replete with profanity, insults, violent implications, and exaggerated statements."

She pointed out that Drake himself had used comparable rhetoric, quoting a lyric in which the artist "heavily" implied that "his opponent is a spouse beater", and another where he "raps that he 'heard' that one of Lamar's sons may not be his biological offspring."

Regarding the track in question, Judge Vargas said: "Even apparent statements of fact may take on the nature of subjective views... when made in open discourse, intense arguments, or other circumstances in which an audience may expect the use of slurs, passionate language or exaggeration."

Responding to the dismissal, a label representative said: "From the outset, this case was an affront to every creative and their creative expression and should not have seen the light of day."

"We're pleased with the court's dismissal and are eager to continuing our partnership successfully promoting Drake's music and supporting his artistic path," the representative continued.

A representative for the musician said the rapper intended to appeal the ruling, "and we await the appellate court examining it".

Kendrick Lamar has not yet issue a statement on the case.