Drake says Kendrick Lamar’s blockbuster hit “Not Like Us” crossed the line when it accused him of “one of the most vile behaviors imaginable” – being a criminal pedophile. His label, Universal Music Group, says Drake is the one who went too far when he sued his own label for defamation for distributing the Grammy-winning song.
“Plaintiff, one of the most successful recording artists of all time, lost a rap battle that he provoked and in which he willingly participated. Instead of accepting the loss like the unbothered rap artist he often claims to be, he has sued his own record label in a misguided attempt to salve his wounds,” lawyers for UMG wrote in a scathing dismissal motion filed last month. (The rapper has until April 16 to respond to the label’s motion and has said he’ll be filing an amended complaint.)
Experts tell Rolling Stone that Drake’s chances of prevailing appear limited, though he might, just maybe, have a shot of reaching a jury. Either way, the 91-page lawsuit clearly has a dual role as a public relations gambit and vehicle to save face after Drake lost his nine-track rap battle with Lamar last May.
One expert says it could backfire spectacularly. “This feels like it’s all about vanity. And he’s willing to take an entire genre down with him because he lost,” University of Richmond Professor Erik Nielson, co-author of the book Rap on Trial about the use of hip-hop lyrics as criminal evidence, says. “It’s sad. I really do think he’s tarnishing his legacy.”
According to UMG, no “reasonable” listener truly believes Drake is a “certified pedophile,” as Lamar’s song states. In its dismissal filing, UMG reminded Drake that he also used his perch under the UMG umbrella to accuse Lamar of engaging in despicable behavior including domestic abuse.
But Drake is hardly the first to claim song lyrics can be defamatory. Record producer Armen Boladian previously sued funk legend George Clinton over lyrics that branded Boladian a “disgrace to the species.” In a 2005 ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit tossed the case for good, calling the verse a “puerile taunt that, for better or worse, is typical in rap music.” Lindsay Lohan later sued Pitbull over his 2011 song “Give Me Everything.” A federal court sided with Pitbull, saying “the Supreme Court has made clear that music, as a form of expression and communication, is protected under the First Amendment.” One of the most famous cases in this area involved Eminem being sued by former classmate DeAngelo Bailey over the 1999 song “Brain Damage,” which depicted Bailey as a violent bully. The Michigan judge who terminated that case included a ridiculous rap in her 2003 ruling, rhyming that “The lyrics are stories no one would take as fact/they’re an exaggeration of a childish act.”
Editor’s picks
If history is any guide, Drake is not favored to win, with several experts agreeing that he has a high hurdle to overcome. They say music, and battle-rap in particular, is an art form where insults are clear rhetorical hyperbole protected by the First Amendment. Asked to enumerate the strengths and weaknesses of Drake’s case, they weighed in on both sides:
The Problems With Drake’s Complaint
When UMG filed its dismissal motion last month, it blasted Drake as a sore loser. The company said Drake not only encouraged his public feud with Lamar but even goaded him to respond when he thought his nemesis was taking too long. In back-to-back songs released the same day last April, Drake rapped that he was “heatin’ up” the rivalry and wanted to know “what the fuck is taking so long.” In his follow-up song “Family Matters,” released May 3, 2024, Drake accused Lamar of beating and otherwise disrespecting his fiancée. Drake also claimed one of Lamar’s kids was actually sired by Lamar’s business partner.
Related Content
Experts say such context can’t be ignored, meaning Drake was clearly involved in a two-way exchange of diss tracks with Lamar. “Context matters a whole lot in libel lawsuits: where something was said, the words around it, the medium,” says attorney Pete Kennedy, an expert in libel law at the Texas firm Graves, Dougherty, Hearon & Moody who in 1997 successfully defended Tupac Shakur and Interscope in a case involving claims Shakur’s lyrics inspired violence against law enforcement.
For Drake to succeed as a public figure suing for defamation, he’s required to show that a knowingly false statement was communicated as a statement of fact. Kennedy said this could be a real challenge because art and its penchant for hyperbole is protected by the First Amendment.
“Some of the hardest cases to make are when something is contained in a piece of artwork. Art is generally not meant to be taken literally. It’s quite a stretch to claim something that’s in a song that falls within a genre known for people exchanging insults is a statement of fact,” Kennedy says. He said Drake might also face an even higher standard under the “doctrine of invited libel” because he prodded Lamar’s response. Kennedy likened the nudging to someone giving a former boss as a job reference and then complaining when the ex-boss says something negative.
And while Drake claims in his lawsuit that “millions of people” who listened to “Not Like Us” and watched the video actually believe the pedophile allegation, Kennedy says the court will almost certainly do the homework necessary to determine what a “reasonable” rap fan would believe.
“Just because some people might think something that’s obviously not true is true, that doesn’t mean you get to a jury,” Kennedy explains. “There are people who think The Onion is true because they don’t know what The Onion is. The judge will look at this and ask: could a reasonable reader who reads the whole thing and is relatively intelligent spot and understand that this is parody or hyperbole?”
According to Nielson, rap battles and diss tracks are famous for being as audacious and inflammatory as possible in an attempt to get the other side to concede defeat. He said such back-and-forth battles are akin to The Dozens, a game popularized in African-American communities where nothing is off limits and people who fail to understand the rules might take offense.
“It’s hard to watch what Drake is doing right now. He’s embarrassing himself,” Nielson says. “Drake knows the rules. He’s been in some pretty tough battles. He’s not adhering to the rules now because he lost. He got his ass handed to him, and he’s acting like a petulant child.”
Nielson said rap fans know not to take lyrics literally. “I understand being called a pedophile is disgusting. It’s one of the most insulting things you can imagine. But what has always made rap music so successful and popular is that it pushes the limits, rhetorically.”
Kennedy, meanwhile, also took aim at Drake’s claim that UMG had an incentive to brand him a pedophile because the company is set to renegotiate his contract this year. In his lawsuit, Drake and his lawyers allege UMG was looking to “gain leverage to force Drake to sign a new deal on terms more favorable to UMG.”
“That’s a ludicrous theory,” Kennedy says. “No record company would want to suggest that one of its artists is a pedophile. Period. Nobody would want to affiliate themselves with a pedophile, end of story. I don’t think a judge will give that a second though.”
The Strengths in Drake’s Case
One lawyer familiar with musicians suing over a rival’s lyrics had a different take. He said while he believes Drake has a “high burden and a high bar” to succeed with his lawsuit, “there are some arguments to be made.”
Warren Fitzgerald Muhammad represented former Destiny’s Child members LeToya Luckett and LaTavia Roberson when they sued Beyoncé, among others, for an allegedly libelous line in the hit song “Survivor.” They said the disputed line – “You thought I wouldn’t sell without you, sold 9 million” – was out of bounds after the parties settled a prior contract dispute and signed a non-disparagement clause. Luckett and Roberson’s case was dismissed on procedural grounds and abandoned, but Fitzgerald Muhammad said he still believes song lyrics can be defamatory. In Drake’s case, specifically, he believes Drake could be helped by the line in Lamar’s song “Euphoria,” released April 30, 2024, that states, “Don’t tell no lie about me and I won’t tell truths ‘bout you.”
“He’s advancing the notion that he’s about to disclose some actual facts,” the lawyer tells Rolling Stone, referring to Lamar. “On its face, this is a difficult case. But Drake can stitch things together to say that what was being alleged was meant as a statement of fact, not just opinion.”
Jonathan Grunberg also has experience with defamation claims in a celebrity case. He helped represent the cave spelunker who sued Elon Musk and made it to trial in Los Angeles. A jury ultimately let Musk off the hook, finding he wasn’t being literal when he called plaintiff Vernon Unsworth a “pedo guy” in a tweet, but the case got much further than many expected. Grunberg says Drake’s lawsuit could similarly find its way to a jury with a specific approach seeking to use Texas state law even though the lawsuit was filed in federal court in New York. Drake is a citizen of Texas, so he could argue that the law of his home state of Texas should apply under New York’s “significant relationship” test, Grunberg says. That test could find that Texas’s connection to the parties’ dispute is stronger than New York’s, he says.
“New York provides far greater protections than most other states for defendants in defamation cases based on statements of opinion,” Grunberg explains. “Texas law follows the U.S. Supreme Court’s approach on the issue of whether statements of opinion are protected – an approach that is far more favorable to a plaintiff in a defamation case than New York law. Under Texas law, Drake has a strong argument that a jury – not the judge – should decide if Kendrick is actually accusing Drake of being a pedophile, including because some listeners may reasonably understand that Kendrick is literally accusing Drake of being a pedophile.”
The lawyer said the notion that rap lyrics can’t communicate literal and factual accusations simply because they’re part of a rap song is debatable. “This brings to mind the controversy over prosecutors using rap lyrics against defendants in criminal cases – a tactic that assumes rappers mean what they say in their music,” Grunberg says. “Drake, himself, has advocated against this tactic, but he now must argue that rap lyrics are understood as statements of fact, as opposed to mere nonliteral, creative expression. Ultimately, the fact that prosecutors have secured convictions relying, in part, on rap lyrics, demonstrates that rap lyrics are capable of communicating factual statements that can be the basis for a defamation claim.”
Trending Stories
Nielson says that if Drake’s lawsuit is successful, it could redefine the rap genre.
“I’m concerned because this could be a terrific gift for police and prosecutors if he’s successful. They will lean on the logic of this lawsuit to justify using lyrics in criminal cases,” Nielson said. “This could have a real chilling effect on the industry.”
