Drake’s lawsuit accused Universal of valuing “corporate greed over the safety and well-being of its artists.”
Credit...Prince Williams/WireImage

Drake Sues His Label, Calling Kendrick Lamar’s ‘Not Like Us’ Defamatory

In a federal lawsuit on Wednesday, Drake accused Universal Music Group of putting his life and reputation at risk by releasing and promoting the popular diss track.

by · NY Times

During a venomous back-and-forth barrage of diss tracks last year, the rappers Drake and Kendrick Lamar accused each other of phoniness, hypocrisy and abuse. But while fans anointed Lamar’s chart-topping single “Not Like Us” the battle’s knockout blow, Drake saw the song’s punchlines invoking pedophilia as something far more insidious — and with real-world consequences.

In a lawsuit filed Wednesday in federal court, the artist born Aubrey Drake Graham sued Universal Music Group, the record company behind both rappers, for defamation and harassment, calling its release and promotion of “Not Like Us” an example of valuing “corporate greed over the safety and well-being of its artists.”

The suit, brought in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, accuses Universal of having “approved, published, and launched a campaign to create a viral hit out of a rap track” that was “intended to convey the specific, unmistakable, and false factual allegation that Drake is a criminal pedophile, and to suggest that the public should resort to vigilante justice in response.”

Noting that the cover art for “Not Like Us” features a photo of Drake’s Toronto home dotted with markers meant to represent the presence of registered sex offenders, the complaint invokes a shooting at the residence days after the song’s release that injured a security guard — calling it “the 2024 equivalent of ‘Pizzagate’” — and cites two other attempted trespassers in the days that followed.

The suit was brought on behalf of Drake by Michael J. Gottlieb, a partner at the firm Willkie Farr & Gallagher, who has previously represented the owner of the Washington pizzeria targeted by the “Pizzagate” conspiracy theorists and the election workers falsely accused by Rudolph W. Giuliani of aiding a false plot to steal the 2020 presidential election.

In a statement on Wednesday, Universal Music Group called the claims both untrue and “illogical,” pointing to its longstanding and successful business relationship with Drake.

“We have invested massively in his music and our employees around the world have worked tirelessly for many years to help him achieve historic commercial and personal financial success,” the label said. “Throughout his career, Drake has intentionally and successfully used UMG to distribute his music and poetry to engage in conventionally outrageous back-and-forth ‘rap battles’ to express his feelings about other artists. He now seeks to weaponize the legal process to silence an artist’s creative expression and to seek damages from UMG for distributing that artist’s music.”

Universal added that it would fight the case on its own behalf, as well as to protect “any artist who might directly or indirectly become a frivolous litigation target for having done nothing more than write a song.”

In November, Drake had initiated pre-litigation actions against Universal in state court in New York and Texas, naming Spotify and the radio conglomerate iHeartMedia as potential participants in an elaborate scheme to promote “Not Like Us” using bots and payola. On Tuesday, representatives for Drake withdrew the earlier filing in New York against Universal and Spotify in favor of the federal lawsuit filed Wednesday. A hearing in the Texas matter, which includes iHeartMedia, was delayed until later this month.

The long-simmering tension between Drake and Lamar, who had collaborated early in their careers, exploded into full-on musical beef last spring across eight rapidly released songs that included escalating personal attacks.

On one track, “Family Matters,” Drake questioned whether Lamar’s manager had secretly fathered one of his children and alleged that Lamar had “beat on” his romantic partner and covered it up. Soon after, on “Meet the Grahams,” Lamar equated Drake with Harvey Weinstein, calling him a “pervert” and a “sick man” who “should die” to make the world safer for women.

The following day, Lamar released “Not Like Us,” which includes lyrics like “say, Drake, I hear you like ’em young,” calling the rapper and his crew “certified pedophiles” who should “be registered and placed on neighborhood watch.”

The track — which, according to Drake’s lawsuit, “cloaks cleverly dangerous lyrics behind a catchy beat and inviting hook” — went on to top the Billboard singles chart and has since been streamed more than one billion times on Spotify alone. At the Grammy Awards next month, “Not Like Us” is nominated for five awards, including record and song of the year. The following week, Lamar will headline the Super Bowl halftime show in New Orleans.

“This lawsuit is not about the artist who created ‘Not Like Us,’” the suit says. “It is, instead, entirely about UMG, the music company that decided to publish, promote, exploit, and monetize allegations that it understood were not only false, but dangerous.”

To prove defamation, a public figure must not only show that false information was published, broadcast or spoken, harming their reputation, but that the publisher did so while knowing that the information was false or with substantial doubts about its accuracy.

While Lamar may not have met that standard as a defendant — “this lawsuit is not about a war of words between artists,” the suit reiterates — it argues that Universal would not have been in business with Drake since 2009 if it had reason to believe that any allegations of sex abuse were true.

But, as a potential motive for the company promoting “Not Like Us” aggressively, it invokes contract negotiations between Universal and Lamar — who was under a short-term deal with the company that was extended late last year, according to the suit — as well as with Drake, whose contract is up for renegotiation this year.

“By devaluing Drake’s music and brand, UMG would gain leverage to force Drake to sign a new deal on terms more favorable to UMG,” the suit says.

Drake also accuses Universal of engaging in questionable practices to promote the song, as hinted at in the pre-litigation filings last year, which sought to obtain further information and preserve relevant documentation related to a potential case.

According to the lawsuit, the label “and its agents further put a thumb on the scale by covertly offering financial incentives to third parties to deceptively stream the Recording on streaming platforms, to play the Recording on the radio, and to otherwise promote and endorse the Defamatory Material, all without ever publicly disclosing the payments.”

Following the incidents at his home, Drake attempted to inform Universal about the harm the song was causing, including having to remove his young son from his elementary school “due to safety concerns,” according to the lawsuit, but was told that he “would face humiliation if he brought legal action.”

Explore the World of Hip-Hop