Drake Lawsuit Over Kendrick Lamar’s ‘Not Like Us’ Dismissed by Judge

A federal judge on Thursday (Oct. 9) dismissed Drake’s defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group over Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us,” ruling that a “war of words” during a “heated rap battle” did not violate the law and that some of the case was “logically incoherent.”

Drake’s case, filed earlier this yearclaimed that UMG defamed him by releasing Lamar’s scathing diss track, which tarred his arch-rival as a “certified pedophile.” He believed that millions of people took that lyric literally, severely harming his reputation.

But just ten months later, Judge Jeannette Vargas granted UMG’s motion to dismiss the case at the outset – ruling that Kendrick’s insulting lyrics were the kind of “hyperbole” that cannot be defamatory because listeners would not think they were statements of fact.

“The artists’ seven-track rap battle was a ‘war of words’ that was the subject of substantial media scrutiny and online discourse,” the judge wrote. “Although the accusation that plaintiff is a pedophile is certainly a serious one, the broader context of a heated rap battle, with incendiary language and offensive accusations hurled by both participants, would not incline the reasonable listener to believe that ‘Not Like Us’ imparts verifiable facts about plaintiff.”

The ruling marks an abrupt end to a legal battle that stunned the music industry. Few expected a rapper to respond to a diss track with a lawsuit – a move that drew ridicule in the hip hop world and condemnation from legal scholars. Fewer still expected him to file it against UMG, his longtime record label and the biggest music company in the world.

Drake’s attorneys can appeal the ruling to a federal appeals court. His attorneys did not immediately return a request for comment.

In a statement to Billboarda spokesman for UMG said: “From the outset, this suit was an affront to all artists and their creative expression and never should have seen the light of day.  We’re pleased with the court’s dismissal and look forward to continuing our work successfully promoting Drake’s music and investing in his career.”

Lamar released “Not Like Us” last May amid a war-of-words with Drake that saw the two UMG stars release a series of bruising diss tracks. The song, a knockout punch that blasted Drake as a “certified pedophile” over an infectious beat, became a chart-topping hit in its own right and won five Grammy Awards, including record and song of the year.

In January, Drake took the unusual step of taking UMG to court, claiming his own label had defamed him by boosting the track’s popularity, including through the use of bots and other nefarious marketing tactics. The lawsuit, which didn’t name Lamar himself as a defendant, alleged that UMG “waged a campaign” against its own artist to spread a “malicious narrative” about pedophilia that it knew to be false.

UMG argued those allegations were clearly meritless – that “hyperbolic insults” and “vitriolic allegations” are par for the course in diss tracks and cannot form the basis for a libel lawsuit. The company pointedly noted that Drake himself was happy to make such attacks, including accusing Lamar of domestic abuse, until he lost the battle.

The dispute got even nastier in February, when Lamar made “Not Like Us” the centerpiece of his Super Bowl halftime show. After speculation about whether he’d play the track at all, Kendrick used the show to mock his rival, looking directly into camera as he rapped “Say, Drake, I hear you like ’em young.”

In her decision on Thursday, Judge Vargas sided entirely with UMG, ruling normal listeners would not expect “accurate factual reporting” from a diss track “replete with profanity, trash-talking, threats of violence, and figurative and hyperbolic language.”

She pointed out that Drake himself had engaged in similar language, quoting from a line in “Family Matters” in which the star was “heavily implying that Lamar is a domestic abuser” and another in which Drake says he heard that “one of Lamar’s sons may not be biologically his.”

“The recording was published as part of a heated public feud, in which both participants exchanged progressively caustic, inflammatory insults and accusations,” Judge Vargas wrote. “This is precisely the type of context in which an audience may anticipate the use of epithets, fiery rhetoric or hyperbole rather than factual assertions.”

The judge also rejected Drake’s arguments about the popularity of “Not Like Us,” saying she could not make that kind of “retroactive analysis” of artistic expression. She wrote that when Kendrick wrote his song, he “could not have been aware” that it would later break streaming records, win Grammys, or be the centerpiece of a Super Bowl halftime show.

“Yet plaintiff would have the court divorce the recording from the context in which it was created because of these subsequent events,” Judge Vargas wrote. “Whether publications constitute actionable fact or protected opinion cannot vary based upon the popularity they achieve. Constitutional guarantees do not rest on such a flimsy foundation.”

The judge was equally unimpressed with the Drake’s claim that the song became defamatory because UMG repeatedly republished it and drove its success: “This argument is logically incoherent,” the judge wrote. “If the recording was nonactionable opinion at the time it was initially produced, then its
republication would not expose UMG to liability.”