The fallout from the Drake-Kendrick rap battle is still ongoing, and UMG is blasting Lawbrey’s lawsuit, calling his allegations “astonishing.”
Source: Mike Marsland/WireImage
As BOSSIP previously reported, Drake filed the first lawsuit in November 2024. In January 2025, he withdrew the New York complaint and refiled it as a federal defamation case. In Drake’s UMG lawsuit, he claims that UMG, in collaboration with Spotify, illegally boosted “Not Like Us” on streaming services. It is his belief that this was done because his contract was up for renewal, meaning UMG was invested in seeing Drake’s downfall, so negotiations were in their favor.
In response to the lawsuit, UMG told Billboard, “The suggestion that UMG would do anything to undermine any of its artists is offensive and untrue. We employ the highest ethical practices in our marketing and promotional campaigns. No amount of contrived and absurd legal arguments in this pre-action submission can mask the fact that fans choose the music they want to hear.”
Still, Drake doubled down and amended the lawsuit, adding more recent events, including Lamar’s 2025 Super Bowl performance and the 2025 Grammy Awards. According to Variety, he alleges that UMG promoted Lamar’s Super Bowl performance and consented to “Not Like Us” being played at the Grammys, further defaming the Nokia rapper.
Nevertheless, it looks like UMG isn’t taking Drake’s lawsuit lying down.
In a recent court filing, the label has reportedly moved to dismiss the amended complaint, calling Drake’s new allegations “astonishing.”Variety reports that UMG’s legal team argues that Drake’s claims are baseless and a thinly veiled attempt to save face after what they see as a decisive loss in the rap battle.
Drake’s UMG Lawsuit Reportedly Misses Key Details
The label’s response to Drake UMG lawsuit reportedly doesn’t mince words, suggesting that Drake’s focus on the Super Bowl performance and the omission of certain lyrics only highlights the weakness of his argument.
“As Drake concedes, Lamar’s Super Bowl performance did not include the lyric that Drake or his associates are ‘certified pedophiles’ (i.e., the alleged ‘Defamatory Material’ that is at the heart of this case). The focus of Drake’s new claims—that ‘the largest audience for a Super Bowl halftime show ever’ did not hear Lamar call Drake or his crew pedophiles—betrays this case for what it is: Drake’s attack on the commercial and creative success of the rap artist who defeated him, rather than the content of Lamar’s lyrics,” the motion reads per Variety.
They appear to be framing the lawsuit as an attack on artistic expression and the natural outcome of a public feud that Drake himself willingly engaged in. The motion to dismiss suggests UMG is pointing out the irony of Drake, an artist known for provocative lyrics himself, now claiming defamation. The label is seemingly ready to fight back against what they perceive as a frivolous attempt to rewrite the narrative of Kendrick and Drake’s highly publicized rap clash.
“Nowhere in the hundred-plus page ‘legal’ blather written by Drake’s lawyers do they bother to acknowledge that Drake himself has written and performed massively successful songs containing equally provocative taunts against other artists. Nor do they mention that it was Drake who started this particular exchange. Apparently, Drake’s lawyers believe that when Drake willingly participates in a performative rap-battle of music and poetry, he can be ‘defamed’ even though he engages in the exact same form of creative expression,” an UMG spokesperson told Variety.
The case is currently still in the discovery phase, in which Drake and his legal team have access to documents like Kendrick Lamar’s contract. A judge should decide on UMG”s motion to dismiss in the coming months.
Loading ... 