🔗 Share this article

A judge has thrown out Drake's legal claim targeting Universal Music Group over Kendrick Lamar's track the diss record.

Presiding Judge Jeannette Vargas decided that the rapper’s lyrics, which accused Drake and his crew of being "pedophiles", were "protected opinion" and cannot be deemed defamatory.

Drake filed the lawsuit in January, claiming UMG, the record label representing the two rappers, of defamatory conduct by permitting the track to be released and promoted, saying it disseminated a "untrue and harmful story".

Drake's representative said he planned to challenge the decision. UMG said it was pleased with the result and was looking forward to resuming its work with the rapper.

Background of the Rap Battle

The diss song, which was first dropped in May 2024, was widely seen as the decisive blow in an ongoing battle between the rival rappers.

It has emerged as the biggest hit of Lamar's musical journey, having won multiple Grammy awards and being one of the most-discussed highlights of his Super Bowl performance in early 2025.

In a detailed ruling, Judge Vargas called the dispute between the artists "the most notorious hip-hop feud in the genre's history".

"The artists' seven-track rap battle was a 'war of words' that was the focus of extensive press coverage and digital debate," the court noted.

"Although the accusation that plaintiff is a pedophile is certainly a serious one, the wider backdrop of a heated rap battle, with provocative remarks and insulting claims exchanged by both participants, would not lead the average audience to believe that 'the track' conveys truthful statements about the claimant."

She also noted that, in an previous track, the artist had "challenged Lamar to make the paedophilia accusations" that featured in the diss record.

On the song his own release, the rapper 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 lines as 'Hey Drake, I’ve heard you prefer them young' must be evaluated," stated the court.

"The parallel in the wording suggests strongly that this lyric is a direct callback to Drake's lyrics in the prior song."

'An Affront to Artists'

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

His lawyers accused UMG of launching "an effort to create a popular song" out of a release that made the "untrue claim that the artist is a criminal paedophile, and to suggest that the audience should resort to extra-legal action in response".

Deciding against Drake, the judge said listeners would not expect "accurate factual reporting" from a diss track "replete with vulgar language, insults, violent implications, and exaggerated statements."

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

Regarding Lamar's song, the court said: "Although 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 audience may anticipate the use of epithets, fiery rhetoric or exaggeration."

Responding to the rejection, a UMG spokesperson said: "From the outset, this lawsuit was an affront to every creative and their artistic freedom and should not have been filed."

"We are satisfied with the judge’s ruling and look forward to resuming our partnership effectively marketing Drake's music and supporting his artistic path," the spokesperson continued.

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

Kendrick Lamar has not yet issue a statement on the legal matter.