🔗 Share this article

A court official has thrown out Drake's legal claim against Universal Music Group concerning Kendrick Lamar's track the diss record.

Judge Jeannette Vargas determined that Lamar's lyrics, which claimed the artist and his associates of being "certified paedophiles", were "nonactionable opinion" and could not be considered defamatory.

Drake submitted the lawsuit in January, accusing UMG, the music company behind the two rappers, of defamation by permitting the track to be published and marketed, stating it spread a "false and malicious narrative".

Drake's representative stated he planned to challenge the ruling. Universal Music Group expressed it was pleased with the outcome and was eager to continuing its work with the rapper.

Context of the Hip-Hop Feud

The diss song, which was initially released in May 2024, was widely seen as the decisive blow in an continuing feud between the rival rappers.

It has emerged as the most successful track of Lamar's musical journey, 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 detailed ruling, Judge Vargas called the dispute between the artists "the most notorious hip-hop feud in the genre's history".

"Both rappers’ series of diss tracks was a 'war of words' that was the focus of substantial media scrutiny and online discourse," the judge noted.

"While the accusation that plaintiff is a pedophile is undoubtedly a serious one, the wider backdrop of a intense musical rivalry, with incendiary language and offensive accusations exchanged by each artist, would not lead the average audience to believe that 'the track' conveys verifiable facts 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 song 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 track suggested.

"Against this backdrop in which such lyrics as 'Hey Drake, I’ve heard you prefer them young' must be assessed," wrote Judge Vargas.

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

'An Affront to Artists'

The musician, whose legal name is Aubrey Graham, did not sue Lamar in the lawsuit.

His legal team alleged the label of initiating "an effort to create a viral hit" out of a release that made the "untrue claim that the artist is a criminal paedophile, and to imply that the audience should turn to extra-legal action in retaliation".

Deciding against the plaintiff, Judge Vargas said listeners would not expect "accurate factual reporting" from a diss track "replete with profanity, insults, threats of violence, and exaggerated statements."

She highlighted that Drake himself had engaged in similar language, quoting a line in which the artist "heavily" implied that "his opponent is a spouse beater", and another where he "claims that he 'was told' that one of Lamar's sons may not be biologically his."

Concerning the track in question, the court said: "Although apparent statements of fact may assume the character of statements of opinion... when made in public debate, heated labour dispute, or other circumstances in which an listener may anticipate the use of slurs, passionate language or hyperbole."

Reacting to the rejection, a label representative said: "From the outset, this lawsuit was an insult to every creative and their artistic freedom and should not have been filed."

"We're pleased with the court's dismissal and look forward to resuming our work effectively marketing the artist’s work and investing in his career," the representative continued.

A representative for the musician said the rapper planned to contest the decision, "and we await the Court of Appeals reviewing it".

Lamar has yet to issue a statement on the legal matter.