🔗 Share this article

A judge has thrown out the rapper Drake’s defamation lawsuit targeting the music corporation concerning Kendrick Lamar’s track the diss record.

Judge Jeannette Vargas ruled that the rapper’s song lyrics, which claimed the artist and his associates of being "certified paedophiles", were "protected opinion" and cannot be considered defamatory.

The Canadian rapper submitted the lawsuit in early this year, accusing Universal Music Group, the record label representing both artists, of defamation by permitting the track to be released and promoted, stating it spread a "untrue and harmful story".

Drake's representative stated he planned to challenge the ruling. UMG expressed it was satisfied with the outcome and was looking forward to resuming its work with the rapper.

Background of the Rap Battle

The diss song, which was initially released in spring 2024, was widely seen as the decisive blow in an continuing feud between the rival rappers.

It has emerged as the biggest hit of Lamar's career, having won multiple Grammy awards and being one of the most-discussed moments of his Super Bowl half-time show in February.

In a 38-page order, Judge Vargas called the row between the artists "the most notorious hip-hop feud in the history of rap music".

"Both rappers’ series of diss tracks was a 'verbal conflict' that was the subject of substantial media scrutiny and digital debate," the court noted.

"Although the claim that Drake is a child predator is undoubtedly a serious one, the broader context of a heated rap battle, with incendiary language and insulting claims hurled by each artist, would not incline the reasonable listener to believe that 'the track' conveys verifiable facts about plaintiff."

She also noted that, in an earlier song, the artist had "dared Lamar to make the pedophile claims" that featured in the diss record.

On the song his own release, Drake used the AI-generated voice of Tupac Shakur to suggest strategies on how to win the rap battle.

"Suggest he has a preference for minors, consider that a tip," the track proposed.

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

"The parallel in the phrasing suggests strongly that this line is a clear reference to Drake's lyrics in the prior song."

'A Slap in the Face to Creatives'

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

His lawyers alleged UMG of launching "a campaign to create a viral hit" out of a release that made the "false factual allegation that the artist is a criminal paedophile, and to suggest that the public should turn to vigilante justice in response".

Deciding against Drake, the judge said listeners would not expect "accurate factual reporting" from a musical attack "replete with vulgar language, insults, threats of violence, and figurative and hyperbolic language."

She highlighted that Drake himself had used similar language, referencing a lyric in which the artist "strongly" suggested that "his opponent is a spouse beater", and a separate instance where Drake "claims that he 'was told' that one of his rival’s children may not be biologically his."

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 similar situations in which an listener may expect the use of epithets, fiery rhetoric or exaggeration."

Reacting to the dismissal, a UMG spokesperson said: "From the outset, this lawsuit was an insult to every creative and their artistic freedom and never should have been filed."

"We're pleased with the court's dismissal and look forward to continuing our work successfully marketing the artist’s work and supporting his artistic path," the spokesperson continued.

A representative for the musician said the rapper planned to appeal the ruling, "and we look forward to the appellate court reviewing it".

Lamar has yet to comment on the legal matter.