🔗 Share this article

A judge has thrown out Drake's legal claim targeting Universal Music Group over Kendrick Lamar’s track the diss record.

Judge Jeannette Vargas ruled that Lamar's song lyrics, which claimed the artist and his crew of being "pedophiles", were "nonactionable opinion" and could not be considered libelous.

The Canadian rapper submitted the lawsuit in January, claiming Universal Music Group, the record label behind both artists, of defamatory conduct by allowing the track to be published and marketed, saying it disseminated a "untrue and harmful story".

The artist’s representative said he intended to appeal the decision. Universal Music Group expressed it was satisfied with the result and was eager to resuming its work with the musician.

Context of the Hip-Hop Feud

The diss song, which was first dropped in spring 2024, was widely seen as the decisive blow in an continuing feud between the competing artists.

It has become the biggest hit of the rapper’s career, having received multiple Grammy awards and being one of the most-discussed moments of his Super Bowl half-time show in February.

In a 38-page order, Judge Vargas called the dispute between the artists "the most notorious hip-hop feud in the genre's history".

"Both rappers’ seven-track rap battle was a 'verbal conflict' that was the focus of substantial media scrutiny and digital debate," the court wrote.

"While the claim that Drake is a pedophile is certainly a grave allegation, the broader context of a intense musical rivalry, with incendiary language and insulting claims hurled by both participants, would not lead the reasonable listener to believe that 'the track' imparts verifiable facts about the claimant."

She additionally observed that, in an previous track, the artist had "challenged Lamar to make the paedophilia accusations" that appeared in Not Like Us.

On the song his own release, the rapper used the AI-generated voice of the late rapper to suggest strategies on how to win the rap battle.

"Talk about him likin' young girls, that's a gift from me," the song suggested.

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

"The similarity in the wording suggests strongly that this lyric is a direct callback to the artist’s own words in the prior song."

'A Slap in the Face to Creatives'

The musician, whose legal name is Aubrey Drake Graham, did not sue Lamar in the lawsuit.

His lawyers accused the label of initiating "an effort to create a popular song" out of a track that made the "untrue claim that the artist is a criminal paedophile, and to imply that the audience should turn to extra-legal action in retaliation".

Deciding against Drake, Judge Vargas said listeners would not expect "accurate factual reporting" from a musical attack "replete with vulgar language, trash-talking, violent implications, and exaggerated statements."

She pointed out that Drake himself had used comparable rhetoric, quoting a lyric in which the artist "heavily" implied that "his opponent is a spouse beater", and a separate instance where he "raps that he 'was told' that one of his rival’s children may not be biologically his."

Concerning Lamar's song, Judge Vargas said: "Although apparent statements of fact may take on the nature of statements of opinion... when made in open discourse, intense arguments, or similar situations in which an listener may anticipate the use of slurs, fiery rhetoric or hyperbole."

Reacting to the rejection, a label representative said: "From the beginning, this case was an insult to all artists and their artistic freedom and never should have been filed."

"We're pleased with the judge’s ruling and look forward to resuming our partnership successfully marketing the artist’s work and supporting his career," the representative added.

A spokesperson for Drake said the artist planned to appeal the decision, "and we await the Court of Appeals examining it".

Lamar has not yet comment on the legal matter.