🔗 Share this article

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

Judge Jeannette Vargas ruled that Lamar's song lyrics, which accused the artist and his associates of being "pedophiles", were "nonactionable opinion" and cannot be deemed defamatory.

The Canadian rapper filed the legal action in early this year, accusing Universal Music Group, the music company representing both artists, of defamation by allowing the track to be published and promoted, stating it disseminated a "untrue and harmful story".

Drake's spokesperson stated he planned to appeal the ruling. UMG said it was pleased with the result and was eager to continuing its work with the rapper.

Background of the Rap Battle

The diss song, which was initially released in May 2024, was broadly viewed as the decisive blow in an ongoing battle between the competing artists.

It has become the biggest hit of Lamar's career, having received multiple Grammy awards and being one of the most-talked about highlights of his Super Bowl half-time show in February.

In a detailed ruling, Judge Vargas called the row between the artists "the most notorious hip-hop feud in the history of rap music".

"Both rappers’ seven-track rap battle was a 'war of words' that was the subject of extensive press coverage and digital debate," the judge noted.

"While the claim that Drake is a child predator is undoubtedly a grave allegation, the broader context of a intense musical rivalry, with provocative remarks and insulting claims hurled by both participants, would not incline the reasonable listener to believe that 'Not Like Us' imparts verifiable facts about plaintiff."

She additionally observed that, in an previous track, the artist had "challenged Lamar to make the pedophile claims" that appeared in the diss record.

On the track his own release, Drake used the AI-generated voice of the late rapper to give Lamar advice 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 lyrics as 'Hey Drake, I’ve heard you prefer them young' must be assessed," wrote the court.

"The parallel in the phrasing suggests strongly that this line is a clear reference to Drake's lyrics in the earlier release."

'A Slap in the Face to Creatives'

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

His lawyers alleged the label of launching "a campaign to create a popular song" out of a track that made the "untrue claim that the artist is a criminal paedophile, and to suggest that the public should resort to extra-legal action in response".

Ruling against the plaintiff, the judge said listeners would not expect "accurate factual reporting" from a diss track "filled with vulgar language, trash-talking, threats of violence, and figurative and hyperbolic language."

She highlighted that the rapper himself had engaged in similar language, quoting a line in which the star "heavily" implied that "Lamar is a domestic abuser", and another where he "claims that he 'heard' that one of Lamar's sons may not be biologically his."

Regarding Lamar's song, Judge Vargas said: "Even apparent statements of fact may assume the character of statements of opinion... when made in open discourse, intense arguments, or similar situations in which an listener may expect the use of epithets, fiery rhetoric or exaggeration."

Responding to the rejection, a UMG representative said: "From the outset, this lawsuit was an affront to every creative and their artistic freedom and should not have seen the light of day."

"We're pleased with the court's dismissal and are eager to continuing our work effectively marketing Drake's music and supporting his career," the representative added.

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

Kendrick Lamar has not yet issue a statement on the case.