Los Angeles, California — Drake’s legal battle with Universal Music Group (UMG) continues as the company has formally requested the dismissal of the rapper’s amended defamation lawsuit initially filed in April.
Drake’s original lawsuit emerged in January, targeting UMG over Kendrick Lamar’s track “Not Like Us.” He accused the label of damaging his reputation by promoting a song he claims includes harmful allegations. Following a previous motion to dismiss filed by UMG in March, Drake’s legal team issued an amended complaint last month, emphasizing developments since the case’s inception. This iteration argues that UMG actively promoted the song during Lamar’s Super Bowl halftime performance and sanctioned its play at the upcoming 2025 Grammy Awards.
In a response on Wednesday, UMG reiterated its dismissal request, largely echoing the arguments from its first motion while addressing Drake’s recent allegations. The label’s attorneys pointed out that Drake revised his complaint, removing clearly spurious claims but introducing what they termed “astonishing new allegations.”
Regarding Lamar’s Super Bowl halftime show, UMG’s legal representatives asserted that no defamatory statement about Drake was uttered during the performance. They contended that the focus of Drake’s recent claims demonstrates an attempt to undermine the success of another artist rather than address the song’s lyrical content.
A spokesperson for UMG criticized Drake’s legal approach, highlighting the rapper’s own history of daring lyrics directed at other artists. This statement emphasized that the legal arguments ignore Drake’s participation in a competitive musical landscape involving guest appearances and rap battles, where such provocative expressions are commonplace.
Drake’s representatives did not respond to requests for comments regarding UMG’s statements.
In their 33-page legal document, UMG elaborated on points made previously, suggesting that Drake selectively presented online commentary as proof that audiences took “Not Like Us” literally rather than recognizing it as artistic expression. The label’s attorneys stressed that anonymous internet comments are unreliable and do not contribute meaningfully to substantiating defamation claims.
Moreover, UMG indicated that Drake had previously abandoned his allegations suggesting that UMG used bots to artificially inflate streams of “Not Like Us.” They noted that he now references statements made by different individuals that claim Lamar may have benefited from dubious promotional tactics. The label characterized such online claims as speculative and untrustworthy.
UMG reiterated its commitment to supporting its artists, including Drake, while fostering their creative output. Despite the ongoing efforts to dismiss the suit, the discovery process continues. Earlier this month, a judge denied UMG’s attempt to halt discovery, allowing Drake to seek access to contracts and related documents involving Lamar and the label.
As the legal proceedings unfold, both sides are preparing for what could be a prolonged battle over the implications of artistic expression within the competitive world of hip-hop.