🔗 Share this article

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

Presiding Judge Jeannette Vargas ruled that Lamar'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 submitted the legal action in early this year, accusing UMG, the record label representing the two rappers, of defamatory conduct by allowing the track to be published and marketed, saying it spread a "false and malicious narrative".

The artist’s representative stated he planned to challenge the ruling. UMG said it was satisfied with the outcome and was eager to continuing its work with the rapper.

Background of the Hip-Hop Feud

Not Like Us, which was first dropped in spring 2024, was broadly viewed as the final strike in an ongoing battle between the competing artists.

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 highlights of his Super Bowl performance in February.

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

"Both rappers’ series of diss tracks was a 'war of words' that was the subject of substantial media scrutiny and digital debate," the court wrote.

"While the accusation that Drake is a child predator is certainly a serious one, the wider backdrop of a heated rap battle, with incendiary language and offensive accusations exchanged by both participants, would not incline the reasonable listener to believe that 'the track' conveys truthful statements about plaintiff."

She additionally observed that, in an previous track, Drake had "dared his rival to make the pedophile claims" that appeared in Not Like Us.

On the track his own release, Drake 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 track suggested.

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

"The parallel in the phrasing strongly indicates that this line is a direct callback to the artist’s own words in the prior song."

'A Slap in the Face to Creatives'

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

His legal team accused the label of initiating "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 suggest that the audience should resort to vigilante justice in retaliation".

Deciding against Drake, the judge said fans would not expect "truthful accounts" from a diss track "filled with vulgar language, trash-talking, threats of violence, and figurative and hyperbolic language."

She highlighted that Drake himself had engaged in comparable rhetoric, quoting a line in which the star "heavily" implied that "his opponent is a spouse beater", and a separate instance where Drake "raps that he 'was told' that one of his rival’s sons may not be biologically his."

Regarding the track in question, Judge Vargas said: "Although apparent statements of fact may assume the character of subjective views... when made in open discourse, intense arguments, or other circumstances in which an listener may expect the use of epithets, fiery rhetoric or exaggeration."

Responding to the rejection, a UMG spokesperson said: "From the beginning, this case was an affront 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 artist intended to contest the decision, "and we look forward to the appellate court reviewing it".

Kendrick Lamar has not yet issue a statement on the legal matter.