🔗 Share this article

A judge has thrown out Drake's defamation lawsuit against the music corporation concerning Kendrick Lamar's track the diss record.

Presiding Judge Jeannette Vargas ruled that the rapper’s song lyrics, which claimed the artist and his crew of being "pedophiles", were "nonactionable opinion" and cannot be considered defamatory.

Drake submitted the lawsuit in early this year, accusing UMG, the record label representing the two rappers, of defamatory conduct by permitting the song to be released and marketed, stating it disseminated a "false and malicious narrative".

Drake's representative stated he intended to challenge the ruling. Universal Music Group expressed it was satisfied with the result and was looking forward to resuming its work with the rapper.

Context of the Rap Battle

The diss song, which was first dropped in May 2024, was broadly viewed as the final strike in an ongoing battle between the rival rappers.

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

In a detailed ruling, Judge Vargas called the dispute between the rappers "the most infamous rap battle in the genre's history".

"The artists' seven-track rap battle was a 'verbal conflict' that was the focus of extensive press coverage and online discourse," the court wrote.

"While the claim that Drake is a pedophile is certainly a grave allegation, the wider backdrop of a intense musical rivalry, with incendiary language and insulting claims hurled by each artist, would not lead the reasonable listener to believe that 'the track' conveys truthful statements about the claimant."

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

On the track Taylor Made Freestyle, Drake used the synthetic vocals of the late rapper to give Lamar advice on how to win the rap battle.

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

"It is in this context in which such lines as 'Hey Drake, I’ve heard you prefer them young' must be evaluated," wrote Judge Vargas.

"The parallel in the phrasing suggests strongly that this line is a direct callback to the artist’s own words in the earlier release."

'An Affront to Artists'

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

His lawyers accused the label of initiating "a campaign to generate a popular song" out of a track that made the "untrue claim that Drake is a criminal paedophile, and to imply that the audience should turn to extra-legal action in retaliation".

Deciding against Drake, Judge Vargas said listeners would not expect "truthful accounts" from a musical attack "replete with vulgar language, insults, threats of violence, and exaggerated statements."

She pointed out that the rapper himself had used similar language, referencing a line in which the star "heavily" suggested that "Lamar is a domestic abuser", and a separate instance where Drake "raps that he 'was told' that one of Lamar's children may not be his biological offspring."

Concerning the track in question, the court said: "Although seemingly factual claims may assume the character of statements of opinion... when made in public debate, intense arguments, or other circumstances in which an audience may expect the use of epithets, passionate language or exaggeration."

Reacting to the dismissal, a UMG spokesperson said: "From the beginning, this case was an insult to every creative and their creative expression and should not have been filed."

"We are satisfied with the court's dismissal and are eager to continuing our partnership effectively marketing the artist’s work and investing in his career," the representative continued.

A representative for Drake said the artist intended to contest the decision, "and we look forward to the Court of Appeals examining it".

Lamar has not yet comment on the legal matter.