🔗 Share this article

A court official has thrown out Drake's legal claim targeting Universal Music Group concerning Kendrick Lamar's song the diss record.

Presiding Judge the court’s judge decided that Lamar's lyrics, which accused the artist and his associates of being "certified paedophiles", were "protected opinion" and cannot be considered defamatory.

The Canadian rapper filed the lawsuit in early this year, accusing UMG, the record label behind both artists, of defamation by permitting the song to be published and promoted, stating it disseminated a "untrue and harmful story".

Drake's spokesperson stated he intended to appeal the ruling. UMG said it was satisfied with the outcome and was eager to resuming its collaboration with the musician.

Context of the Rap Battle

The diss song, which was first dropped in May 2024, was widely seen as the final strike in an ongoing battle between the competing artists.

It has become the most successful track of Lamar's musical journey, having received five Grammys and being one of the most-discussed moments of his Super Bowl performance in February.

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

"Both rappers’ series of diss tracks was a 'verbal conflict' that was the focus of extensive press coverage and online discourse," the judge wrote.

"While the claim that Drake is a pedophile is undoubtedly a serious one, the broader context of a heated rap battle, with incendiary language and insulting claims hurled by each artist, would not incline the average audience to believe that 'the track' imparts truthful statements about the claimant."

She additionally observed that, in an previous track, Drake had "challenged Lamar to make the paedophilia accusations" that featured in the diss record.

On the track Taylor Made Freestyle, Drake used the AI-generated voice of the late rapper 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 'Hey Drake, I’ve heard you prefer them young' must be assessed," wrote the court.

"The similarity in the phrasing strongly indicates that this line is a clear reference to Drake's lyrics in the earlier release."

'An Affront to Artists'

Drake, whose real name is Aubrey Drake Graham, did not name his rival in the lawsuit.

His legal team alleged the label of initiating "a campaign to create a viral hit" 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 vigilante justice in retaliation".

Deciding against Drake, Judge Vargas said listeners would not expect "truthful accounts" from a musical attack "replete with vulgar language, trash-talking, threats of violence, and exaggerated statements."

She pointed out that the rapper himself had used similar language, referencing a lyric in which the star "strongly" implied that "his opponent is a spouse beater", and another where he "claims that he 'heard' that one of Lamar's children may not be biologically his."

Concerning the track in question, Judge Vargas said: "Although seemingly factual claims may assume the character of statements of opinion... when made in public debate, intense arguments, or similar situations in which an listener may expect the use of slurs, passionate language or exaggeration."

Reacting to the rejection, a label spokesperson said: "From the outset, this lawsuit was an insult to every creative and their artistic freedom and never should have been filed."

"We are satisfied with the court's dismissal and are eager to continuing our partnership effectively promoting the artist’s work and supporting his career," the spokesperson added.

A representative for Drake said the rapper intended to contest the decision, "and we look forward to the appellate court reviewing it".

Lamar has yet to comment on the case.