Drake has filed a defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group (UMG), the record label that both he and rival Kendrick Lamar share, following the release of Lamar's diss track 'Not Like Us'.
The lawsuit, filed in a New York federal court on Wednesday, marks a new chapter in the ongoing dispute between the two rappers.
This move comes shortly after the Canadian rapper, born Aubrey Drake Graham, withdrew a legal challenge he made against UMG and Spotify. The earlier filing, which was not a lawsuit but a petition for documents, accused the two companies of inflating the popularity of Lamar's track. In that filing, Drake's legal team claimed that UMG paid influencers and radio stations to artificially boost the song's visibility across streaming platforms.
In his new defamation lawsuit, Drake accuses UMG of harassment and defamation, alleging that the promotion of 'Not Like Us' was designed to harm his reputation. The track, which topped the US charts, contains lyrics that label Drake a “certified pedophile.” The lawsuit claims that UMG’s involvement in launching and promoting the track led to a campaign that falsely portrayed Drake as a criminal.
Drake's legal team argues that UMG not only approved the song but actively worked to make it go viral, despite the controversial and defamatory content. The suit highlights the song's artwork, which included a picture of Drake’s house with markers indicating the homes of registered sex offenders. It also references a shooting outside Drake's residence just days after the song’s release, which injured a security guard. The lawsuit ties this incident, along with multiple trespassing attempts, to the toxic public reaction fueled by the defamatory lyrics, likening it to the infamous 2016 "Pizzagate" conspiracy, which accused a pizzeria of being a hub for child trafficking.
The tension between Drake and Lamar intensified in 2023, following the release of Lamar's 'Not Like Us', which not only accused Drake of being a pedophile but also labeled him a “colonizer” exploiting the hip-hop scene. The track’s success on streaming platforms, including record-breaking streams on Spotify, added fuel to the feud, which had already seen a series of diss tracks exchanged between the two artists.
In November, Drake filed another petition in Texas, alleging that UMG paid radio group iHeartRadio to promote 'Not Like Us' and that the company allowed the release of the song despite its damaging lyrics. Drake’s legal team also accused UMG of using bots to boost the track’s streams on Spotify, creating the illusion of greater popularity. Both UMG and Spotify denied these allegations, with UMG calling them “contrived and absurd” and Spotify asserting that it had no incentive to favor one artist over another.
Drake is being represented by Michael J. Gottlieb, a lawyer known for handling high-profile cases, including representing the owner of a Washington D.C. pizzeria that was targeted by the “Pizzagate” conspiracy theorists. Gottlieb’s experience with similar defamation and harassment cases adds credibility to Drake’s lawsuit.
UMG has yet to comment on the new lawsuit, but previously dismissed the allegations as baseless. The company has also defended the release of 'Not Like Us', emphasizing that they would never undermine their artists for corporate gain. Spotify has similarly denied any wrongdoing, stating that it has no financial incentive to manipulate streams in favor of any particular artist.
Despite the ongoing legal drama, Drake has largely stayed out of the spotlight musically since the feud with Lamar escalated. He released four tracks in August and collaborated with Camila Cabello and Fuerza Regida on other projects. However, earlier this month, Drake returned to solo material with the freestyle 'Fighting Irish', which addressed his feud with Lamar and the lost friendships that resulted from it. In one of the verses, Drake reflects on the “colonizer” accusation and the disloyalty he felt from those close to him.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ