🔗 Share this article

A court official has rejected the rapper Drake’s legal claim targeting the music corporation over Kendrick Lamar’s track Not Like Us.

Presiding Judge the court’s judge decided that the rapper’s lyrics, which claimed Drake and his crew of being "certified paedophiles", were "nonactionable opinion" and cannot be deemed defamatory.

Drake filed the legal action in early this year, accusing UMG, the record label behind both artists, of defamatory conduct by permitting the track to be published and marketed, saying it disseminated a "false and malicious narrative".

The artist’s representative stated he intended to appeal the ruling. Universal Music Group said it was satisfied with the outcome and was eager to continuing its work with the musician.

Background of the Hip-Hop Feud

Not Like Us, 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 Lamar's career, having received five Grammys and being one of the most-talked about highlights of his Super Bowl performance in early 2025.

In a detailed ruling, the judge 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 subject of extensive press coverage and online discourse," the judge noted.

"While the accusation that Drake is a child predator is undoubtedly a grave allegation, the broader context of a intense musical rivalry, with incendiary language and offensive accusations exchanged by each artist, would not incline the average audience to believe that 'the track' conveys truthful statements about plaintiff."

She also noted that, in an previous track, the artist had "dared Lamar to make the paedophilia accusations" that appeared in the diss record.

On the song Taylor Made Freestyle, the rapper used the synthetic vocals 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," stated Judge Vargas.

"The parallel in the wording suggests strongly that this lyric is a clear reference to Drake's lyrics in the prior song."

'An Affront to Artists'

Drake, whose legal name is Aubrey Drake Graham, did not sue his rival in the legal filing.

His lawyers accused UMG of launching "a campaign to generate a popular song" out of a release that made the "untrue claim that Drake is a criminal paedophile, and to suggest that the public should turn to extra-legal action in response".

Ruling against Drake, the judge said fans would not expect "accurate factual reporting" 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 artist "heavily" suggested that "Lamar is a domestic abuser", and another where he "raps that he 'heard' that one of his rival’s children may not be biologically his."

Concerning Lamar's song, Judge Vargas said: "Even seemingly factual claims may take on the nature of subjective views... when made in open discourse, heated labour dispute, or similar situations in which an audience may expect the use of epithets, fiery rhetoric or hyperbole."

Responding to the dismissal, a UMG spokesperson said: "From the outset, this lawsuit was an insult to every creative and their artistic freedom and should not have been filed."

"We are satisfied with the judge’s ruling and are eager to continuing our work successfully marketing the artist’s work and investing in his artistic path," the spokesperson continued.

A representative for Drake said the artist intended to appeal the ruling, "and we await the Court of Appeals reviewing it".

Lamar has yet to issue a statement on the legal matter.