🔗 Share this article

A court official has thrown out the rapper Drake’s legal claim targeting Universal Music Group concerning Kendrick Lamar’s song the diss record.

Presiding Judge Jeannette Vargas ruled that Lamar's song lyrics, which accused Drake and his associates of being "certified paedophiles", were "nonactionable opinion" and cannot be considered defamatory.

The Canadian rapper filed the legal action in early this year, claiming Universal Music Group, the record label behind both artists, of defamation by allowing the track to be published and promoted, saying it disseminated a "false and malicious narrative".

The artist’s representative said he intended to appeal the ruling. Universal Music Group said it was satisfied with the outcome and was eager to resuming its collaboration with the rapper.

Context of the Hip-Hop Feud

The diss song, which was initially released in spring 2024, was widely seen as the decisive blow in an ongoing battle between the competing artists.

It has become the biggest hit of the rapper’s career, having won multiple Grammy awards and being one of the most-discussed moments of his Super Bowl half-time show in early 2025.

In a 38-page order, Judge Vargas called the row between the rappers "the most notorious hip-hop feud in the genre's history".

"Both rappers’ series of diss tracks was a 'war of words' that was the subject of substantial media scrutiny and digital debate," the court wrote.

"While the claim that Drake is a child predator is undoubtedly a serious one, the broader context of a intense musical rivalry, with incendiary language and insulting claims hurled by both participants, would not incline the average audience to believe that 'the track' imparts truthful statements about the claimant."

She additionally observed that, in an previous track, the artist had "challenged his rival to make the paedophilia accusations" that appeared in Not Like Us.

On the song Taylor Made Freestyle, the rapper used the AI-generated voice of Tupac Shakur to give Lamar advice on how to win the rap battle.

"Talk about him likin' young girls, that's a gift from me," the song suggested.

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

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

'An Affront to Artists'

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

His legal team alleged the label of initiating "an effort to create a popular song" out of a track that made the "untrue claim that Drake is a criminal paedophile, and to suggest that the audience should resort to extra-legal action in response".

Deciding against Drake, Judge Vargas said fans would not expect "accurate factual reporting" from a musical attack "filled with vulgar language, insults, threats of violence, and figurative and hyperbolic language."

She highlighted that Drake himself had engaged in comparable rhetoric, referencing a lyric in which the star "strongly" suggested that "Lamar is a domestic abuser", and another where Drake "claims that he 'was told' that one of his rival’s children may not be his biological offspring."

Concerning Lamar's song, Judge Vargas 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 listener may anticipate the use of slurs, passionate language or hyperbole."

Reacting to the rejection, a label representative said: "From the outset, this case was an affront to all artists and their artistic freedom and should not have been filed."

"We're pleased with the judge’s ruling and are eager to resuming our partnership successfully promoting Drake's music and supporting his artistic path," the spokesperson continued.

A representative for the musician said the artist intended to contest the ruling, "and we await the appellate court reviewing it".

Kendrick Lamar has not yet comment on the legal matter.