🔗 Share this article

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

Judge Jeannette Vargas ruled that Lamar's song lyrics, which claimed Drake and his crew of being "certified paedophiles", were "protected opinion" and cannot be considered libelous.

The Canadian rapper submitted the lawsuit in January, accusing UMG, the record label representing both artists, of defamatory conduct by allowing the track to be released and marketed, saying it disseminated a "false and malicious narrative".

The artist’s representative stated he planned to appeal the ruling. UMG said it was satisfied with the result and was looking forward to continuing its collaboration with the musician.

Context of the Hip-Hop Feud

Not Like Us, which was initially released in spring 2024, was widely seen as the decisive blow in an ongoing battle between the rival rappers.

It has emerged as the most successful track of the rapper’s career, having won five Grammys and being one of the most-talked about moments of his Super Bowl performance in early 2025.

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

"The artists' series of diss tracks was a 'verbal conflict' that was the focus of extensive press coverage and digital debate," the court noted.

"Although the accusation that plaintiff is a child predator is undoubtedly a grave allegation, the broader context of a heated rap battle, with incendiary language and insulting claims exchanged by both participants, would not incline the reasonable listener to believe that 'Not Like Us' conveys truthful statements about plaintiff."

She also noted that, in an previous track, Drake had "dared Lamar to make the paedophilia accusations" that appeared in the diss record.

On the song Taylor Made Freestyle, the rapper used the synthetic vocals of the late rapper to suggest strategies on how to win the rap battle.

"Suggest he has a preference for minors, consider that a tip," the track proposed.

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

"The similarity in the phrasing strongly indicates that this lyric is a clear reference to the artist’s own words in the prior song."

'An Affront to Artists'

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

His legal team alleged the label of initiating "a campaign to create a viral hit" out of a release that made the "untrue claim that the artist is a convicted predator, and to imply that the audience should turn to vigilante justice in retaliation".

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

She highlighted that Drake himself had engaged in similar language, referencing a line in which the star "strongly" implied that "his opponent is a domestic abuser", and a separate instance where Drake "raps that he 'was told' that one of his rival’s children may not be his biological offspring."

Regarding Lamar's song, the court said: "Although apparent statements of fact may assume the character of subjective views... when made in public debate, intense arguments, or similar situations in which an audience may expect the use of slurs, passionate language or hyperbole."

Responding to the dismissal, a label representative said: "From the beginning, this lawsuit was an insult to all artists and their creative expression and should not have seen the light of day."

"We're pleased with the judge’s ruling and are eager to continuing our work successfully promoting Drake's music and investing in his career," the spokesperson continued.

A representative for Drake said the rapper intended to appeal the ruling, "and we look forward to the Court of Appeals examining it".

Lamar has not yet issue a statement on the case.