🔗 Share this article

A judge has dismissed the rapper Drake’s legal claim against the music corporation concerning Kendrick Lamar's song Not Like Us.

Judge Jeannette Vargas decided that the rapper’s lyrics, which accused the artist and his crew of being "certified paedophiles", were "nonactionable opinion" and cannot be considered libelous.

The Canadian rapper filed the lawsuit in January, claiming UMG, the music company representing both artists, of defamation by permitting the song to be published and promoted, saying it spread a "untrue and harmful story".

Drake's representative stated he intended to appeal the ruling. Universal Music Group expressed it was pleased with the outcome and was looking forward to continuing its collaboration with the rapper.

Background of the Hip-Hop Feud

The diss song, which was initially released in May 2024, was widely seen as the decisive blow in an continuing feud between the competing artists.

It has emerged as the most successful track of Lamar's musical journey, having won multiple Grammy awards and being one of the most-talked about highlights of his Super Bowl half-time show 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".

"Both rappers’ series of diss tracks was a 'war of words' that was the subject of extensive press coverage and online discourse," the court noted.

"Although the claim that Drake is a pedophile is undoubtedly a serious one, the wider backdrop of a heated rap battle, with incendiary language and offensive accusations exchanged by each artist, would not incline the reasonable listener to believe that 'the track' conveys truthful statements about plaintiff."

She also noted that, in an previous track, the artist had "dared his rival to make the paedophilia accusations" that featured in Not Like Us.

On the track his own release, Drake 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.

"It is in this context in which such lyrics as 'Hey Drake, I’ve heard you prefer them young' must be assessed," stated Judge Vargas.

"The parallel in the phrasing strongly indicates that this line is a direct callback to the artist’s own words in the prior song."

'An Affront to Artists'

Drake, whose legal name is Aubrey Graham, did not name Lamar in the legal filing.

His legal team alleged UMG of initiating "an effort to create a viral hit" out of a track that made the "false factual allegation that the artist is a convicted predator, and to suggest that the audience should turn to vigilante justice in response".

Deciding against the plaintiff, the judge said fans would not expect "accurate factual reporting" from a musical attack "replete with profanity, insults, violent implications, and exaggerated statements."

She highlighted that the rapper himself had engaged in similar language, quoting a line in which the artist "heavily" suggested that "his opponent is a domestic abuser", and another where he "claims that he 'heard' that one of his rival’s children may not be his biological offspring."

Regarding the track in question, the court said: "Even seemingly factual claims may take on the nature of statements of opinion... when made in public debate, heated labour dispute, or similar situations in which an listener may anticipate the use of epithets, passionate language or hyperbole."

Responding to the rejection, a UMG spokesperson said: "From the beginning, this case was an insult to all artists and their artistic freedom and never should have seen the light of day."

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

A spokesperson for Drake said the rapper intended to contest the ruling, "and we look forward to the Court of Appeals reviewing it".

Lamar has not yet comment on the case.