🔗 Share this article

A court official has dismissed the rapper Drake’s defamation lawsuit targeting Universal Music Group concerning Kendrick Lamar's song the diss record.

Judge the court’s judge decided that the rapper’s song lyrics, which accused Drake and his associates of being "pedophiles", were "protected opinion" and cannot be deemed defamatory.

The Canadian rapper filed the legal action in January, accusing Universal Music Group, the record label representing the two rappers, of defamatory conduct by allowing the track to be published and marketed, stating it spread a "false and malicious narrative".

The artist’s spokesperson stated he planned to appeal the decision. UMG expressed it was satisfied with the outcome and was looking forward to continuing its collaboration with the rapper.

Background of the Rap Battle

The diss song, which was initially released in May 2024, was broadly viewed as the decisive blow in an ongoing battle between the competing artists.

It has become the biggest hit of Lamar's career, having won five Grammys and being one of the most-discussed moments of his Super Bowl half-time show in early 2025.

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

"The artists' series of diss tracks was a 'war of words' that was the subject of extensive press coverage and online discourse," the judge wrote.

"Although the accusation that Drake is a pedophile is undoubtedly a grave allegation, the broader context of a intense musical rivalry, with incendiary language and offensive accusations exchanged by each artist, would not lead the reasonable listener to believe that 'the track' imparts truthful statements about plaintiff."

She additionally observed that, in an earlier song, the artist had "dared Lamar to make the pedophile claims" that appeared in the diss record.

On the track his own release, Drake used the AI-generated voice of the late rapper to give Lamar advice on how to win the rap battle.

"Suggest he has a preference for minors, consider that a tip," the song suggested.

"Against this backdrop in which such lines as 'Say, Drake, I hear you like 'em young' must be assessed," stated the court.

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

'An Affront to Artists'

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

His lawyers accused the label of initiating "a campaign to generate a popular song" out of a track that made the "false factual allegation that Drake is a convicted predator, and to imply that the public should turn to extra-legal action in response".

Deciding against the plaintiff, Judge Vargas said listeners would not expect "truthful accounts" from a musical attack "replete with profanity, trash-talking, violent implications, and exaggerated statements."

She highlighted that Drake himself had used similar language, quoting a line in which the star "heavily" implied that "Lamar is a spouse beater", and another where he "raps that he 'was told' that one of his rival’s children may not be biologically his."

Concerning the track in question, the court said: "Even seemingly factual claims may take on the nature of statements of opinion... when made in public debate, heated labour dispute, or other circumstances in which an listener may anticipate the use of epithets, passionate language or hyperbole."

Reacting to the rejection, a UMG representative said: "From the beginning, this case was an affront to all artists and their creative expression and should not have been filed."

"We're pleased with the judge’s ruling and are eager to resuming our partnership effectively promoting the artist’s work and investing in his career," the spokesperson added.

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

Kendrick Lamar has yet to issue a statement on the legal matter.