🔗 Share this article

A court official has thrown out the rapper Drake’s legal claim against the music corporation over Kendrick Lamar’s song the diss record.

Presiding Judge Jeannette Vargas determined that Lamar's lyrics, which claimed the artist and his crew of being "certified paedophiles", were "protected opinion" and could not be considered defamatory.

Drake submitted the lawsuit in early this year, accusing Universal Music Group, the music company representing the two rappers, of defamation by allowing the track to be published and marketed, stating it disseminated a "false and malicious narrative".

Drake's representative said he intended to challenge the decision. UMG expressed it was satisfied with the outcome and was eager to continuing its collaboration with the musician.

Background of the Rap Battle

The diss song, which was first dropped in spring 2024, was widely seen as the final strike in an continuing feud between the rival rappers.

It has emerged as the biggest hit of the rapper’s musical journey, having won five Grammys and being one of the most-discussed highlights of his Super Bowl half-time show in February.

In a detailed ruling, the judge called the dispute between the artists "the most notorious hip-hop feud in the history of rap music".

"The artists' seven-track rap battle was a 'verbal conflict' that was the focus of substantial media scrutiny and online discourse," the court wrote.

"Although the accusation that Drake is a pedophile is certainly a grave allegation, the wider backdrop of a heated rap battle, with incendiary language and offensive accusations exchanged by both participants, would not incline the reasonable listener to believe that 'the track' conveys truthful statements about the claimant."

She also noted that, in an previous track, the artist had "dared Lamar to make the paedophilia accusations" that featured in the diss record.

On the track his own release, the rapper used the synthetic vocals 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 song suggested.

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

"The parallel in the wording suggests strongly that this line is a direct callback to Drake's lyrics in the prior song."

'An Affront to Artists'

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

His lawyers accused the label of initiating "an effort to create a viral hit" out of a track that made the "false factual allegation that Drake is a criminal paedophile, and to suggest that the public should resort to extra-legal action in response".

Deciding against the plaintiff, the judge said fans would not expect "truthful accounts" from a musical attack "filled with profanity, insults, violent implications, and figurative and hyperbolic language."

She highlighted that Drake himself had used comparable rhetoric, quoting a lyric in which the artist "heavily" suggested that "Lamar is a domestic abuser", and another where Drake "raps that he 'was told' that one of Lamar's children may not be his biological offspring."

Concerning Lamar's song, the court said: "Even seemingly factual claims may take on the nature of statements of opinion... when made in open discourse, heated labour dispute, or similar situations in which an listener may anticipate the use of slurs, fiery rhetoric or hyperbole."

Responding to the dismissal, a UMG representative said: "From the outset, this case was an insult to all artists and their artistic freedom and never should have seen the light of day."

"We are satisfied with the judge’s ruling and are eager to continuing our work successfully promoting Drake's music and investing in his career," the spokesperson continued.

A representative for Drake said the artist planned to contest the decision, "and we await the appellate court examining it".

Kendrick Lamar has not yet issue a statement on the legal matter.