🔗 Share this article

A court official has rejected the rapper Drake’s defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group concerning Kendrick Lamar’s song the diss record.

Judge the court’s judge decided that Lamar's lyrics, which claimed Drake and his crew of being "certified paedophiles", were "nonactionable opinion" and cannot be considered libelous.

Drake submitted the lawsuit in early this year, claiming Universal Music Group, the record label representing both artists, of defamatory conduct by permitting the track to be released and marketed, saying it spread a "false and malicious narrative".

The artist’s representative said he planned to challenge the decision. UMG expressed it was pleased with the outcome and was looking forward to resuming its collaboration with the rapper.

Context of the Rap Battle

The diss song, which was first dropped in spring 2024, was widely seen as the final strike in an ongoing battle between the rival rappers.

It has become the biggest hit of the rapper’s musical journey, having won multiple Grammy awards and being one of the most-discussed moments of his Super Bowl performance in early 2025.

In a detailed ruling, the judge called the dispute between the artists "the most infamous rap battle in the history of rap music".

"Both rappers’ series of diss tracks was a 'war of words' that was the subject of substantial media scrutiny and digital debate," the judge wrote.

"Although the claim that Drake is a pedophile is undoubtedly a serious one, the broader context of a intense musical rivalry, with provocative remarks and insulting claims hurled by both participants, would not lead the average audience to believe that 'the track' imparts verifiable facts about plaintiff."

She additionally observed that, in an earlier song, Drake had "dared his rival to make the paedophilia accusations" that appeared in Not Like Us.

On the song Taylor Made Freestyle, Drake used the synthetic vocals of the late rapper to suggest strategies on how to win the rap battle.

"Suggest he has a preference for minors, consider that a tip," the song proposed.

"Against this backdrop in which such lines as 'Hey Drake, I’ve heard you prefer them young' must be assessed," stated Judge Vargas.

"The similarity in the phrasing suggests strongly that this line is a clear reference to the artist’s own words in the prior song."

'A Slap in the Face to Creatives'

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

His lawyers alleged the label of initiating "an effort to generate a popular song" out of a release that made the "false factual allegation that Drake is a convicted predator, and to imply that the public should resort to vigilante justice in response".

Ruling against the plaintiff, Judge Vargas said listeners would not expect "accurate factual reporting" from a musical attack "replete with profanity, trash-talking, violent implications, and exaggerated statements."

She pointed out that Drake himself had used comparable rhetoric, quoting a line in which the artist "heavily" suggested that "his opponent is a domestic abuser", and another where he "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: "Although seemingly factual claims may take on the nature of statements of opinion... when made in open discourse, heated labour dispute, or other circumstances in which an audience may anticipate the use of slurs, passionate language or exaggeration."

Responding to the dismissal, a UMG spokesperson said: "From the outset, this case was an insult to all artists and their creative expression and should not have been filed."

"We're pleased with the court's dismissal and look forward to resuming our partnership effectively promoting the artist’s work and investing in his career," the spokesperson continued.

A spokesperson for the musician said the rapper planned to appeal the decision, "and we await the appellate court examining it".

Lamar has yet to comment on the legal matter.