🔗 Share this article

A court official has rejected Drake's defamation lawsuit targeting Universal Music Group over Kendrick Lamar’s track Not Like Us.

Judge Jeannette Vargas ruled that the rapper’s lyrics, which accused the artist and his crew of being "certified paedophiles", were "nonactionable opinion" and cannot be deemed defamatory.

The Canadian rapper submitted the lawsuit in early this year, claiming Universal Music Group, the record label representing both artists, of defamatory conduct by permitting the track to be released and marketed, saying it disseminated a "untrue and harmful story".

The artist’s spokesperson said he planned to appeal the ruling. UMG said it was pleased with the result and was eager to resuming its collaboration with the musician.

Background of the Rap Battle

The diss song, which was first dropped in May 2024, was widely seen as the final strike in an continuing feud between the competing artists.

It has emerged as the biggest hit of Lamar's career, having won multiple Grammy awards and being one of the most-talked about highlights of his Super Bowl half-time show in early 2025.

In a detailed ruling, Judge Vargas called the row between the rappers "the most infamous rap battle in the history of rap music".

"The artists' seven-track rap battle was a 'verbal conflict' that was the subject of substantial media scrutiny and digital debate," the judge wrote.

"Although the accusation that plaintiff is a pedophile is certainly a serious one, the wider backdrop of a intense musical rivalry, with provocative remarks and offensive accusations exchanged by both participants, would not lead the reasonable listener to believe that 'the track' imparts truthful statements about plaintiff."

She additionally observed that, in an earlier song, Drake had "dared his rival to make the paedophilia accusations" that appeared in the diss record.

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.

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

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

"The parallel in the wording strongly indicates that this lyric is a direct callback to Drake's lyrics in the earlier release."

'A Slap in the Face to Creatives'

The musician, whose legal name is Aubrey Graham, did not name Lamar in the legal filing.

His legal team accused UMG of launching "a campaign to generate a viral hit" out of a track that made the "false factual allegation that Drake is a convicted predator, and to imply that the public should resort to vigilante justice in retaliation".

Ruling against the plaintiff, Judge Vargas said listeners would not expect "accurate factual reporting" from a musical attack "replete with profanity, trash-talking, violent implications, and exaggerated statements."

She highlighted that the rapper himself had used comparable rhetoric, referencing a line in which the artist "strongly" suggested that "Lamar is a domestic abuser", and a separate instance where Drake "raps that he 'was told' that one of his rival’s sons may not be his biological offspring."

Concerning the track in question, Judge Vargas said: "Even seemingly factual claims may take on the nature of statements of opinion... when made in open discourse, intense arguments, or similar situations in which an listener may expect the use of slurs, passionate language or hyperbole."

Responding to the dismissal, a label representative said: "From the beginning, this case was an affront to all artists and their creative expression and never should have been filed."

"We are satisfied with the judge’s ruling and look forward to continuing our partnership successfully promoting the artist’s work and supporting his artistic path," the spokesperson added.

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

Kendrick Lamar has yet to comment on the legal matter.