The highly publicized feud between star rapper Drake and his record label, Universal Music Group (UMG), has taken to the courtroom, as Drake has filed a defamation lawsuit against UMG due to its promotion of Kendrick Lamar's diss track 'Not Like Us'. The song, released on May 4, 2024, quickly rose to fame, claiming the top spot on Billboard's charts and earning multiple Grammy Awards, including Record of the Year. Yet, amid the accolades, Drake's lawsuit alleges UMG employed unethical tactics to boost the track's reach, aiming to damage his reputation.
Drake formally initiated his legal battle against UMG in January 2025, claiming the label's promotion of the track utilized bots and payola—a practice where payment is made to radio stations to play songs—to unfairly escalate the song's visibility. The Canadian rapper contends such promotion contributed to real-world repercussions, including armed attacks at his home and multiple security incidents. During this tumultuous period, Drake's legal challenges suggest he feels betrayed by UMG, the very entity through which he secured his career.
UMG responded vigorously, filing a motion to dismiss the lawsuit on March 17, 2025. Their defense builds on the argument the lyrics of 'Not Like Us' fall under artistic expression, characterized as rhetorical hyperbole rather than slanderous statements of fact. The label remarked, "Drake lost a rap battle... He has sued his own record label... to salve his wounds," implying Drake's lawsuit is merely a defensive reaction to setbacks within their rivalry.
Legal experts note the challenges Drake may face in proving defamation, stating courts typically extend broad creative freedoms to artists. UMG's lawyers articulate their stance by emphasizing the historical precedent of diss tracks within the rap genre, arguing these songs revolve around exaggerated insults rather than factual accusations. They add, "Diss tracks are a popular and celebrated art form centered around outrageous insults, and they would be severely chilled if Drake's suit were permitted to proceed."
One of the key aspects of UMG's argument is based on Drake's own previous advocacy for artistic expression. Less than three years prior, he signed a petition condemning the misuse of artists' works against them legally, showcasing his own hypocrisy as he now seeks legal remedy for what he claims are damaging lyrics. UMG's motion highlights this contradiction, asserting, "Drake was right then and is wrong now" with regard to using lyrical content as legal fact.
Drake's attorney, Michael J. Gottlieb, has been vocal about the motivations behind UMG's motion, identifying it as part of their strategy to sidestep accountability. He states, “This motion is a desperate ploy by UMG to avoid accountability for profiting from dangerous misinformation,” emphasizing the impact the promotion of 'Not Like Us' has had on Drake's life and livelihood. Gottlieb insists the lawsuit is not merely about artistic rivalry but stems from real-world consequences due to the portrayal of Drake within the song.
Drake's claims assert 'Not Like Us' not only exposes him to reputational damage but suggests he is involved with criminal activities, with accusations framed as factual statements. The associated cover art depicted Drake's home with sex offender markers, intensifying the personal nature of the assault. The lawsuit suggests this imagery and the subsequent promotion led to attempted break-ins, alarming safety concerns for Drake and his family.
Now, as both the New York court case and UMG's motion to dismiss await resolution, the legal ramifications of this dispute could substantially influence the broader dynamics of artistic expression within the music industry. UMG has argued the complexity and significance of their promotional decisions surrounding diss tracks must be understood within the historical narrative of hip-hop, which often embraces provocative statements and aggressive exchanges.
Fans and commentators have shifted their focus toward the courtroom drama, questioning whether the legal system will protect artistic freedom or respond to reputational harm suffered by artists involved. Observers are left wondering whether Drake's legal claims will resonate within the courts or if UMG's defense will reaffirm the rights of artists to engage freely within their craft.
Looking toward future dates, the pretrial hearing for Drake's lawsuit is scheduled for April 2025, where evidence and arguments from both sides will take the stage. The outcome may not only shape the careers of those involved but potentially set precedents for how similar artistic disputes are treated legally. Will the courts side with Drake’s claims of label sabotage, or will UMG’s defense of free expression prevail?
