🔗 Share this article

A court official has thrown out the rapper Drake’s legal claim targeting the music corporation over Kendrick Lamar's song the diss record.

Presiding Judge the court’s judge determined that the rapper’s song lyrics, which accused Drake and his associates of being "pedophiles", were "nonactionable opinion" and could not be deemed defamatory.

Drake submitted the lawsuit in January, claiming Universal Music Group, the music company representing both artists, of defamatory conduct by permitting the song to be published and marketed, saying it disseminated a "untrue and harmful story".

Drake's representative said he intended to appeal the ruling. Universal Music Group said it was satisfied with the result and was looking forward to continuing its collaboration with the rapper.

Background of the Hip-Hop Feud

The diss song, which was first dropped in May 2024, was broadly viewed as the final strike in an continuing feud between the rival rappers.

It has emerged as the most successful track 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, Judge Vargas called the dispute between the artists "the most notorious hip-hop feud 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 digital debate," the court wrote.

"While the accusation that Drake is a pedophile is certainly a grave allegation, the wider backdrop of a heated rap battle, with incendiary language and insulting claims hurled by both participants, would not incline the reasonable listener to believe that 'Not Like Us' conveys verifiable facts about the claimant."

She also noted that, in an earlier song, the artist had "dared Lamar to make the pedophile claims" that appeared in the diss record.

On the song his own release, Drake used the AI-generated voice 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 song suggested.

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

"The parallel in the phrasing suggests strongly that this lyric is a direct callback to the artist’s own words in the earlier release."

'A Slap in the Face to Creatives'

Drake, whose real name is Aubrey Graham, did not sue his rival in the lawsuit.

His legal team accused the label of launching "an effort to create a popular song" out of a release that made the "false factual allegation that the artist is a convicted predator, and to imply that the public should resort to extra-legal action in response".

Deciding against Drake, Judge Vargas said listeners would not expect "accurate factual reporting" from a musical attack "replete with profanity, insults, threats of violence, and figurative and hyperbolic language."

She highlighted that Drake himself had used comparable rhetoric, quoting a lyric in which the star "heavily" suggested that "his opponent is a domestic abuser", and a separate instance where he "claims that he 'was told' that one of Lamar's children may not be his biological offspring."

Concerning Lamar's song, the court said: "Although seemingly factual claims may assume the character of subjective views... when made in open discourse, heated labour dispute, or similar situations in which an listener may expect the use of slurs, fiery rhetoric or hyperbole."

Responding to the dismissal, a UMG spokesperson said: "From the beginning, this case was an affront to every creative and their creative expression and should not have seen the light of day."

"We're pleased with the judge’s ruling and look forward to resuming our partnership effectively marketing the artist’s work and investing in his artistic path," the representative added.

A spokesperson for the musician said the artist planned to appeal the ruling, "and we await the appellate court reviewing it".

Lamar has not yet issue a statement on the case.