Drake Files Defamation Lawsuit Against Universal Music Group Over Kendrick Lamar’s Diss Track
The long-standing rivalry between Drake and Kendrick Lamar has taken a dramatic legal turn. The Canadian rapper has filed a defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group (UMG), accusing the label of promoting Kendrick lamar’s diss track Not Like Us at the expense of his safety and reputation. The lawsuit, filed in federal court, alleges that UMG’s actions led to harassment and defamation against Drake, including false accusations of pedophilia.
The Diss Track That Sparked the Legal Battle
The feud between Drake and Kendrick Lamar dates back over a decade, but it reached new heights in 2024 when Lamar released Not Like us, a scathing diss track targeting Drake. The song, which became a viral sensation, includes lyrics describing Drake as a “scrounger,” a ”scavenger,” and even insinuates he is a “certified pedophile”—a jab at Drake’s 2021 album, Certified Lover Boy.
Drake claims that UMG, the parent label for both artists, not only authorized the release of the track but actively promoted it to “create a viral success.” In his complaint, he argues that the label’s actions contributed to his defamation by “conveying false accusations of pedophilia” and endangering his safety.
Safety Concerns and Allegations of Greed
The lawsuit highlights the personal toll the feud has taken on Drake. The cover art for Not Like Us features a photo of Drake’s Toronto home,which he claims led to real-world consequences. Following the song’s release, Drake alleges he was the victim of a shooting outside his residence and faced two attempted break-ins.
Drake accuses UMG of prioritizing profits over artist safety, stating that the label “showed greed to the detriment of the safety and well-being of its artists.” This marks a significant escalation in the ongoing conflict, as Drake takes legal action against his own record company.
Spotify Drawn Into the Feud
The legal battle doesn’t stop at UMG. Drake has also filed a complaint against Spotify, alleging that the streaming platform colluded with UMG to promote Not Like Us at the expense of his own diss tracks. According to the lawsuit, UMG allegedly struck a deal with Spotify to reduce licensing fees in exchange for the platform heavily recommending Lamar’s song to users.
drake further claims that UMG and Spotify used “bots” to artificially inflate the song’s streaming numbers, a practice he describes as unethical and damaging to his career.
Both UMG and Spotify have denied the allegations. A UMG representative told The Verge that the label adheres to ”ethical practices,” emphasizing that “fans choose what they want to hear.” Spotify,meanwhile,dismissed drake’s claims as ”false” and ”far-fetched,” stating that no such agreement with UMG ever existed.
A Decade-Long Rivalry Comes to a Head
The legal action is the latest chapter in a rivalry that has captivated hip-hop fans for years. Drake and Kendrick Lamar have traded barbs through music for over a decade, but the release of Not Like Us has taken the feud to unprecedented levels.The song has been streamed over a billion times on Spotify, making it one of the most triumphant diss tracks in history.
Drake’s decision to sue his own label and a major streaming platform underscores the high stakes of this feud. It also raises questions about the role of record labels and streaming services in shaping the narratives of artists’ careers.
Key Points at a Glance
| Aspect | Details |
|————————–|—————————————————————————–|
| Lawsuit Filed By | Drake against Universal Music Group (UMG) and Spotify |
| Allegations | Defamation, harassment, and unethical promotion of kendrick Lamar’s Not Like Us |
| Key Claims | UMG promoted false accusations of pedophilia; Spotify allegedly used bots to inflate streams |
| Safety Concerns | Shooting and break-in attempts at Drake’s Toronto home |
| Responses | UMG and Spotify deny all allegations, calling them “false” and “far-fetched” |
What’s next?
As the legal battle unfolds, fans and industry insiders alike are watching closely. The outcome could have far-reaching implications for how record labels and streaming platforms operate, especially in the context of artist rivalries and promotional practices.
For now, the feud between Drake and Kendrick Lamar remains one of the most contentious in modern music history. Whether this legal action will bring closure or further escalate the conflict remains to be seen.
Stay tuned for updates as this story develops.Embedded Video: Watch Kendrick Lamar’s Not Like Us
Drake vs. UMG and Spotify: Legal Expert Weighs In on the High-Stakes Feud
The ongoing rivalry between drake and Kendrick Lamar has taken a dramatic legal turn, with Drake filing a defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group (UMG) and Spotify. the lawsuit alleges that UMG promoted Kendrick Lamar’s diss track Not Like Us at the expense of Drake’s reputation and safety,while also accusing Spotify of colluding with UMG to artificially boost the song’s popularity.To unpack the complexities of this case, we sat down with Dr. Marcus Ellington, a legal expert specializing in entertainment law and artist-label disputes.
The Legal Grounds for Drake’s Lawsuit
Senior Editor: dr. ellington, thank you for joining us. Let’s start with the basics. What are the key legal claims Drake is making against UMG and Spotify?
Dr. Marcus Ellington: Thank you for having me. Drake’s lawsuit hinges on three main allegations: defamation, harassment, and unethical business practices. He claims that UMG allowed and even promoted Kendrick Lamar’s not Like Us, which includes lyrics that he argues falsely accuse him of pedophilia. This,he says,has damaged his reputation and even endangered his safety. Additionally, he’s accusing spotify of colluding with UMG to artificially inflate the song’s streaming numbers, which he believes unfairly disadvantaged his own music.
Senior Editor: How strong are these claims from a legal standpoint?
Dr. Marcus Ellington: Defamation cases are notoriously arduous to prove, especially when it comes to artistic expression. Courts often give wide latitude to creative works, including diss tracks, as they’re seen as part of the artistic process. However, Drake’s argument that UMG and spotify engaged in unethical practices—like using bots to inflate streams—could be more compelling if he can provide concrete evidence. The challenge will be proving intent and direct harm.
The Role of Record Labels in Artist Feuds
senior Editor: This case raises questions about the role of record labels in artist rivalries. Should UMG have intervened to prevent the release of Not Like Us?
Dr. Marcus Ellington: That’s a great question. Record labels typically stay out of creative disputes between artists, as they want to avoid being seen as censoring their talent. However, UMG’s involvement in promoting the track—if proven—could be seen as crossing a line. Labels have a fiduciary duty to act in the best interest of all their artists,and if they’re found to have favored one artist over another in a way that caused harm,that could be problematic.
Senior Editor: Drake has also accused UMG of prioritizing profits over artist safety. Is this a common issue in the industry?
Dr.Marcus Ellington: Unfortunately, yes. The music industry is a business, and sometimes the pursuit of profit can overshadow ethical considerations.Drake’s allegations that UMG’s actions led to real-world safety concerns—like the shooting and break-in attempts at his home—are serious. If proven, this could set a precedent for holding labels accountable for the consequences of their promotional strategies.
Spotify’s Alleged Involvement
Senior Editor: let’s talk about Spotify. Drake has accused the platform of colluding with UMG to promote Not like Us. How plausible is this claim?
Dr. Marcus Ellington: It’s a bold accusation, but not entirely implausible. Streaming platforms like Spotify have notable influence over what music gets promoted to users. If Drake can prove that Spotify and UMG had an agreement to prioritize Lamar’s track—perhaps in exchange for reduced licensing fees—that could be a game-changer. Though, Spotify has denied these claims, and without hard evidence, it’s going to be an uphill battle for Drake.
Senior Editor: What about the allegation that bots were used to inflate streaming numbers? Is that a common practise?
Dr. Marcus Ellington: The use of bots to manipulate streaming numbers is a known issue in the industry, though it’s illegal and against the terms of service of platforms like Spotify. If Drake can provide evidence that UMG or Spotify knowingly used bots, that would be a significant blow to their defense. However, proving this will require access to internal data, which could be difficult to obtain.
What’s Next for the Case?
Senior Editor: what do you think the outcome of this case could mean for the music industry?
Dr. Marcus Ellington: This case has the potential to reshape how record labels and streaming platforms operate, particularly when it comes to artist rivalries and promotional practices. If Drake wins,it could lead to stricter regulations on how labels promote their artists and how platforms curate content. On the other hand,if the case is dismissed,it might embolden labels and platforms to continue their current practices. Either way, it’s a landmark case that the industry will be watching closely.
Senior Editor: Thank you, Dr. Ellington, for your insights. This is certainly a case that will have far-reaching implications.
Dr. Marcus Ellington: My pleasure. It’s a fascinating and complex situation, and I look forward to seeing how it unfolds.
Stay tuned to World Today News for updates on this developing story.
