🔗 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 Jeannette Vargas ruled that the rapper’s lyrics, which claimed Drake and his crew of being "certified paedophiles", were "protected opinion" and cannot be considered defamatory.

The Canadian rapper submitted the legal action in January, accusing Universal Music Group, the record label behind the two rappers, of defamatory conduct by permitting the song to be released and marketed, stating it disseminated a "false and malicious narrative".

The artist’s representative stated he intended to appeal the ruling. Universal Music Group said it was pleased with the result and was eager to resuming its work with the musician.

Context of the Hip-Hop Feud

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

It has emerged as the most successful track of Lamar's musical journey, having won five Grammys and being one of the most-talked about moments of his Super Bowl performance in early 2025.

In a 38-page order, the judge called the dispute between the artists "the most infamous rap battle in the genre's history".

"The artists' series of diss tracks was a 'verbal conflict' that was the focus of extensive press coverage and online discourse," the court wrote.

"While the accusation that plaintiff is a child predator is undoubtedly a serious one, the wider backdrop of a heated rap battle, with provocative remarks and offensive accusations hurled by both participants, would not incline the reasonable listener to believe that 'the track' conveys truthful statements about plaintiff."

She also noted that, in an earlier song, the artist had "dared Lamar to make the paedophilia accusations" that appeared in Not Like Us.

On the song his own release, Drake used the AI-generated voice of Tupac Shakur 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 'Hey Drake, I’ve heard you prefer them young' must be evaluated," wrote the court.

"The similarity in the wording strongly indicates that this line is a direct callback to the artist’s own words in the prior song."

'An Affront to Artists'

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

His lawyers alleged UMG of launching "an effort to generate a popular song" out of a release that made the "false factual allegation that Drake is a convicted predator, and to imply that the audience should turn to vigilante justice in response".

Ruling against the plaintiff, the judge said listeners would not expect "accurate factual reporting" from a diss track "filled with profanity, trash-talking, threats of violence, and figurative and hyperbolic language."

She pointed out that the rapper himself had engaged in comparable rhetoric, referencing a line in which the artist "strongly" suggested that "Lamar is a spouse beater", and another where Drake "raps that he 'was told' that one of Lamar's children may not be biologically his."

Concerning Lamar's song, Judge Vargas said: "Even seemingly factual claims 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 epithets, fiery rhetoric or exaggeration."

Reacting to the rejection, a UMG representative said: "From the beginning, this case was an affront to every creative and their artistic freedom and never should have seen the light of day."

"We are satisfied with the judge’s ruling and look forward to continuing our work effectively promoting Drake's music and investing in his career," the representative continued.

A spokesperson for the musician said the rapper intended to contest the ruling, "and we await the Court of Appeals examining it".

Kendrick Lamar has not yet comment on the legal matter.