Drake’s Defamation Case Against UMG Dismissed by New York Federal Court
A federal judge in New York has dismissed Drake’s defamation case against his record label, Universal Music Group (UMG), in connection with a heated rap battle with Kendrick Lamar. Judge Jeannette Vargas ruled that the allegedly defamatory statements at issue are nonactionable opinions, effectively ending the suit against the label.
The decision marks a high-profile intersection of music, free expression, and defamation law, rooted in the fiery exchange between two of hip-hop’s biggest stars. Drake’s legal team has indicated plans to appeal the ruling, signaling that the dispute may not be over despite the dismissal.
The case centers on claims that UMG intentionally published and promoted Kendrick Lamar’s 2024 hit, “Not Like Us,” while allegedly knowing the song’s insinuations that Drake engages in inappropriate sexual conduct with minors were false and defamatory. Drake asserted that the track and its promotion harmed his reputation and subjected him to harassment through the record label’s distribution channels.
The Legal Reasoning Behind the Dismissal
Judge Vargas described the dispute as arising from “perhaps the most infamous rap battle in the genre’s history,” a period marked by intense lyrical feuding. Importantly, she characterized the lyrics of “Not Like Us” as replete with profanity, trash talk, threats of violence, and hyperbolic language. In her view, such elements are indicative of opinion rather than statements of fact that could be proven true or false.
“A rap diss track would not create more of an expectation in the average listener that the lyrics state sober facts instead of opinion than the statements at issue in those cases,” Vargas noted, underscoring the longstanding legal principle that satirical or hyperbolic commentary within music often falls under protected opinion.
UMG released a formal statement after the ruling, saying the lawsuit was an affront to artists and their creative expression and expressing satisfaction with the court’s decision. The label emphasized its ongoing commitment to promoting Drake’s music and investing in his career, despite the legal setback.
Implications for Drake and UMG
The dismissal narrows the avenues for Drake to pursue this matter through the courts, though it does not erase the broader controversy surrounding the release and promotion of Kendrick Lamar’s song. The case has highlighted tensions between artistic expression, brand management, and the legal boundaries of defamation in the realm of music and entertainment.
Drake’s representatives claimed the suit was not directed at Kendrick Lamar, but rather at UMG’s role in distributing the music and “poetry” that allegedly featured harmful insinuations. The legal wrangling places a spotlight on how labels navigate artist conflicts and the potential reputational impacts of diss tracks within the industry’s ecosystem.
In the wake of the ruling, Lamar’s team and supporters have pointed to the song’s critical and commercial success. Lamar’s “Not Like Us” went on to win multiple Grammys in 2025, including Song of the Year and Record of the Year, and he performed it at a major televised event, underscoring the track’s cultural resonance beyond the courtroom.
The Road Ahead
With an appeal anticipated, the legal narrative may extend beyond the original dispute, potentially shaping how future defamation claims connected to music battles are framed and adjudicated. Analysts say the case may influence how record labels handle promotional content and public discourse around rival artists, balancing creative expression with reputational considerations.
As Drake’s team readies its appellate strategy, fans and industry observers will be watching closely to see whether the courts will set new precedents for the treatment of diss tracks, opinions, and potential false statements in a genre known for its provocative and competitive lyrics.
