🔗 Share this article

A judge has thrown out Drake's legal claim targeting the music corporation concerning Kendrick Lamar’s song the diss record.

Judge the court’s judge determined that the rapper’s song lyrics, which accused the artist and his associates of being "certified paedophiles", were "protected opinion" and could not be deemed libelous.

The Canadian rapper filed the lawsuit in early this year, claiming UMG, the record label representing both artists, of defamatory conduct by allowing the track to be released and promoted, saying it spread a "false and malicious narrative".

The artist’s spokesperson stated he planned to appeal the ruling. UMG said it was satisfied with the outcome and was eager to continuing its work with the rapper.

Context of the Rap Battle

The diss song, which was first dropped in May 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 career, having received 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 dispute between the rappers "the most notorious hip-hop feud in the history of rap music".

"The artists' series of diss tracks was a 'war of words' that was the focus of substantial media scrutiny and digital debate," the court noted.

"Although the accusation that Drake is a child predator is certainly a serious one, 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' conveys truthful statements about the claimant."

She additionally observed that, in an earlier song, Drake had "dared his rival to make the pedophile claims" that appeared 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.

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

"The similarity in the wording suggests strongly that this line is a clear reference to Drake's lyrics in the earlier release."

'An Affront to Artists'

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

His lawyers alleged the label of initiating "an effort to generate a popular song" out of a track that made the "untrue claim that Drake is a convicted predator, and to suggest that the audience should turn to vigilante justice in response".

Ruling against the plaintiff, Judge Vargas said listeners would not expect "accurate factual reporting" from a diss track "filled with vulgar language, trash-talking, violent implications, and exaggerated statements."

She pointed out that Drake himself had engaged in similar language, quoting a lyric in which the artist "strongly" implied that "his opponent is a domestic abuser", and another where Drake "claims that he 'was told' that one of Lamar's sons may not be biologically his."

Regarding 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, passionate language or exaggeration."

Responding to the rejection, a label representative said: "From the beginning, this lawsuit was an affront to all artists and their creative expression and should not have seen the light of day."

"We are satisfied with the court's dismissal and look forward to resuming our partnership successfully marketing the artist’s work and supporting his career," the representative added.

A spokesperson for Drake said the artist intended to appeal the ruling, "and we await the appellate court examining it".

Lamar has yet to comment on the legal matter.