🔗 Share this article

A judge has thrown out Drake's legal claim targeting the music corporation over Kendrick Lamar's track the diss record.

Judge the court’s judge determined that the rapper’s lyrics, which claimed Drake and his associates of being "pedophiles", were "nonactionable opinion" and cannot be deemed defamatory.

Drake filed the lawsuit in early this year, claiming Universal Music Group, the record label representing the two rappers, of defamation by permitting the song to be published and marketed, saying it spread a "untrue and harmful story".

Drake's representative said he intended to appeal the ruling. Universal Music Group said it was pleased with the outcome and was looking forward to resuming its work with the rapper.

Context of the Rap Battle

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

It has emerged as the most successful track 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 early 2025.

In a 38-page order, Judge Vargas called the row between the artists "the most infamous rap battle in the history of rap music".

"Both rappers’ series of diss tracks was a 'verbal conflict' that was the focus of substantial media scrutiny and online discourse," the court wrote.

"Although the claim that plaintiff is a child predator is certainly a grave allegation, the broader context of a heated rap battle, with provocative remarks and insulting claims hurled by both participants, would not incline the average audience to believe that 'the track' conveys truthful statements about plaintiff."

She also noted that, in an previous track, Drake had "dared Lamar to make the pedophile claims" that featured in the diss record.

On the song his own release, the rapper used the synthetic vocals of Tupac Shakur to suggest strategies on how to prevail in the feud.

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

"It is in this context in which such lyrics as 'Hey Drake, I’ve heard you prefer them young' must be evaluated," stated the court.

"The parallel in the phrasing strongly indicates that this lyric is a direct callback to Drake's lyrics in the earlier release."

'An Affront to Artists'

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

His legal team accused UMG of launching "an effort to generate a viral hit" out of a track that made the "false factual allegation that the artist 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 vulgar language, insults, violent implications, and figurative and hyperbolic language."

She pointed out that the rapper himself had engaged in comparable rhetoric, referencing a line in which the artist "heavily" suggested that "his opponent is a spouse beater", and another where he "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 apparent statements of fact may take on the nature of subjective views... when made in public debate, heated labour dispute, or other circumstances in which an listener may expect the use of slurs, fiery rhetoric or exaggeration."

Reacting to the dismissal, a UMG representative said: "From the beginning, this lawsuit was an insult to every creative and their creative expression and never should have been filed."

"We are satisfied with the court's dismissal and look forward to resuming our partnership effectively promoting Drake's music and supporting his career," the spokesperson continued.

A spokesperson for Drake said the artist intended to appeal the decision, "and we look forward to the Court of Appeals reviewing it".

Lamar has not yet comment on the case.