🔗 Share this article

A court official has dismissed the rapper Drake’s defamation lawsuit against the music corporation concerning Kendrick Lamar’s song the diss record.

Presiding Judge Jeannette Vargas ruled that the rapper’s lyrics, which accused Drake and his crew of being "certified paedophiles", were "protected opinion" and could not be deemed libelous.

Drake filed the lawsuit in January, accusing UMG, the record label representing the two rappers, of defamatory conduct by allowing the track to be published and promoted, saying it spread a "false and malicious narrative".

Drake's spokesperson stated he planned to challenge the decision. UMG expressed it was pleased with the result and was eager to continuing its collaboration with the musician.

Context of the Rap Battle

The diss song, which was first dropped in May 2024, was broadly viewed 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 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 row between the rappers "the most infamous rap battle in the genre's history".

"The artists' series of diss tracks was a 'war of words' that was the focus of substantial media scrutiny and online discourse," the judge wrote.

"While the claim that Drake is a pedophile is certainly a grave allegation, the wider backdrop of a heated rap battle, with provocative remarks and insulting claims exchanged by both participants, would not incline the reasonable listener to believe that 'the track' conveys verifiable facts about the claimant."

She additionally observed that, in an earlier song, the artist had "dared his rival to make the paedophilia accusations" that appeared in the diss record.

On the song his own release, the rapper used the synthetic vocals of Tupac Shakur to give Lamar advice 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 lines as 'Hey Drake, I’ve heard you prefer them young' must be assessed," wrote Judge Vargas.

"The similarity in the wording strongly indicates that this line is a clear reference 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 legal filing.

His lawyers accused the label of initiating "a campaign to create a viral hit" out of a track that made the "untrue claim that Drake is a criminal paedophile, and to imply that the public should turn to vigilante justice in response".

Deciding against the plaintiff, the judge said fans would not expect "truthful accounts" from a musical attack "replete with vulgar language, insults, threats of violence, and exaggerated statements."

She highlighted that Drake himself had used similar language, referencing a lyric in which the star "heavily" suggested that "Lamar is a spouse beater", and a separate instance where Drake "raps that he 'heard' that one of his rival’s sons may not be biologically his."

Regarding the track in question, Judge Vargas said: "Even seemingly factual claims may take on the nature of subjective views... when made in open discourse, intense arguments, or similar situations in which an audience may expect the use of slurs, fiery rhetoric or exaggeration."

Reacting to the dismissal, a UMG representative said: "From the beginning, this case was an affront to all artists and their artistic freedom and should not have seen the light of day."

"We are satisfied with the court's dismissal and look forward to resuming our work effectively marketing Drake's music and supporting his artistic path," the spokesperson added.

A representative for the musician said the rapper planned to contest the ruling, "and we look forward to the Court of Appeals examining it".

Kendrick Lamar has yet to comment on the case.