🔗 Share this article

A judge has rejected Drake's defamation lawsuit against the music corporation concerning Kendrick Lamar's song the diss record.

Presiding Judge Jeannette Vargas determined that Lamar's song lyrics, which claimed Drake and his associates of being "pedophiles", were "protected opinion" and could not be considered libelous.

Drake submitted the lawsuit in early this year, accusing UMG, the music company representing both artists, of defamation by permitting the track to be released and marketed, stating it disseminated a "false and malicious narrative".

Drake's representative said he intended to challenge the decision. UMG said it was satisfied with the result and was looking forward to continuing its work with the musician.

Background of the Hip-Hop Feud

The diss song, which was initially released in spring 2024, was broadly viewed as the decisive blow in an continuing feud between the competing artists.

It has emerged as the biggest hit of the rapper’s career, having received five Grammys and being one of the most-talked about moments of his Super Bowl half-time show in February.

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

"Both rappers’ seven-track rap battle was a 'verbal conflict' that was the subject of extensive press coverage and online discourse," the judge wrote.

"While the claim that plaintiff is a child predator is undoubtedly a grave allegation, the broader context of a intense musical rivalry, with incendiary language and insulting claims hurled by each artist, would not incline the average audience to believe that 'the track' imparts verifiable facts about the claimant."

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

On the song his own release, Drake used the synthetic vocals of Tupac Shakur to suggest strategies on how to prevail in the feud.

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

"Against this backdrop in which such lyrics as 'Say, Drake, I hear you like 'em young' must be assessed," wrote the court.

"The parallel in the phrasing suggests strongly that this lyric is a clear reference to Drake's lyrics in the earlier release."

'A Slap in the Face to Creatives'

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

His lawyers alleged the label of launching "an effort to create a popular song" out of a track that made the "false factual allegation that the artist is a criminal paedophile, and to imply that the audience should resort to extra-legal action in retaliation".

Ruling against the plaintiff, Judge Vargas said listeners would not expect "truthful accounts" from a musical attack "filled with vulgar language, insults, violent implications, and figurative and hyperbolic language."

She pointed out that Drake himself had used comparable rhetoric, referencing a line in which the artist "strongly" suggested that "his opponent is a domestic abuser", and a separate instance where Drake "raps that he 'heard' that one of his rival’s children may not be his biological offspring."

Concerning the track in question, the court said: "Even seemingly factual claims may take on the nature of statements of opinion... when made in open discourse, intense arguments, or similar situations in which an audience may anticipate the use of epithets, fiery rhetoric or hyperbole."

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

"We are satisfied with the judge’s ruling and look forward to continuing our partnership effectively marketing Drake's music and investing in his career," the spokesperson continued.

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

Lamar has yet to comment on the case.