🔗 Share this article

A judge has dismissed the rapper Drake’s defamation lawsuit targeting the music corporation over Kendrick Lamar’s track the diss record.

Presiding Judge the court’s judge ruled that the rapper’s song lyrics, which accused Drake and his crew of being "pedophiles", were "nonactionable opinion" and cannot be considered defamatory.

Drake filed the lawsuit in early this year, claiming UMG, the record label behind both artists, of defamation by allowing the track to be published and marketed, stating it spread a "false and malicious narrative".

The artist’s representative stated he planned to appeal the decision. Universal Music Group said it was pleased with the outcome and was looking forward to continuing its collaboration with the rapper.

Context of the Hip-Hop Feud

The diss song, which was first dropped in spring 2024, was widely seen as the final strike in an ongoing battle between the competing artists.

It has emerged as the most successful track of Lamar'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 row between the artists "the most infamous rap battle in the genre's history".

"The artists' series of diss tracks was a 'war of words' that was the focus of extensive press coverage and digital debate," the court wrote.

"Although the accusation that plaintiff is a pedophile is certainly a grave allegation, the wider backdrop of a heated rap battle, with incendiary language and offensive accusations exchanged by both participants, would not incline the reasonable listener to believe that 'the track' imparts verifiable facts about plaintiff."

She additionally observed that, in an previous track, Drake had "dared his rival to make the paedophilia accusations" that appeared in Not Like Us.

On the track his own release, Drake 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 suggested.

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

"The similarity in the wording 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'

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

His legal team accused UMG of launching "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 resort to extra-legal action in retaliation".

Deciding against the plaintiff, Judge Vargas said listeners would not expect "truthful accounts" from a diss track "filled with vulgar language, insults, threats of violence, and figurative and hyperbolic language."

She highlighted that the rapper himself had used similar language, quoting a line in which the star "strongly" implied that "his opponent is a spouse beater", and a separate instance where he "claims that he 'was told' that one of Lamar's sons may not be his biological offspring."

Regarding Lamar's song, the court said: "Although seemingly factual claims may assume the character of statements of opinion... when made in public debate, heated labour dispute, or other circumstances in which an listener may anticipate the use of slurs, fiery rhetoric or hyperbole."

Reacting to the rejection, a UMG spokesperson said: "From the beginning, this lawsuit was an affront to all artists and their artistic freedom and should not have been filed."

"We're pleased with the judge’s ruling and are eager to continuing our work successfully marketing the artist’s work and investing in his career," the spokesperson added.

A representative for the musician said the rapper intended to contest the ruling, "and we look forward to the Court of Appeals reviewing it".

Lamar has yet to issue a statement on the legal matter.