🔗 Share this article

A judge has thrown out Drake's legal claim against the music corporation over Kendrick Lamar's track the diss record.

Judge Jeannette Vargas decided that the rapper’s song lyrics, which accused the artist and his crew of being "certified paedophiles", were "protected opinion" and cannot be considered defamatory.

The Canadian rapper filed the legal action in early this year, claiming UMG, the music company behind both artists, of defamatory conduct by allowing the song to be published and promoted, saying it disseminated a "false and malicious narrative".

Drake's representative said he planned to appeal the decision. UMG expressed it was satisfied with the outcome and was looking forward to continuing its work with the rapper.

Context of the Rap Battle

Not Like Us, which was initially released in May 2024, was widely seen as the decisive blow in an continuing feud between the rival rappers.

It has become the biggest hit of Lamar's musical journey, having received multiple Grammy awards and being one of the most-talked about highlights of his Super Bowl half-time show in early 2025.

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

"The artists' series of diss tracks was a 'war of words' that was the focus of substantial media scrutiny and digital debate," the court wrote.

"While the accusation that Drake is a pedophile is undoubtedly a serious one, the wider backdrop of a intense musical rivalry, with provocative remarks and insulting claims hurled by both participants, would not incline the reasonable listener to believe that 'Not Like Us' conveys verifiable facts about the claimant."

She also noted that, in an earlier song, the artist had "dared his rival to make the paedophilia accusations" that featured in Not Like Us.

On the track his own release, Drake 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 song 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 similarity in the phrasing suggests strongly that this line is a clear reference to Drake's lyrics in the earlier release."

'An Affront to Artists'

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

His legal team accused the label of launching "an effort to generate a viral hit" out of a track that made the "untrue claim that the artist is a convicted predator, and to imply that the audience should resort to vigilante justice in response".

Ruling against Drake, the judge said listeners would not expect "truthful accounts" from a diss track "replete with profanity, trash-talking, violent implications, and figurative and hyperbolic language."

She highlighted that Drake himself had engaged in similar language, referencing a line in which the star "strongly" suggested that "his opponent is a spouse beater", and a separate instance where Drake "raps that he 'was told' that one of Lamar's sons may not be biologically his."

Concerning Lamar's song, Judge Vargas said: "Even apparent statements of fact may take on the nature of subjective views... when made in public debate, heated labour dispute, or similar situations in which an audience may anticipate the use of epithets, passionate language or exaggeration."

Responding to the rejection, a UMG representative said: "From the beginning, this case was an insult to every creative and their artistic freedom and should not have seen the light of day."

"We're pleased with the judge’s ruling and are eager to resuming our work successfully marketing Drake's music and investing in his career," the spokesperson continued.

A representative for Drake said the artist planned to contest the ruling, "and we look forward to the appellate court examining it".

Kendrick Lamar has not yet comment on the case.