Judge drops Drake’s defamation suit over Kendrick Lamar’s ‘Not Like Us’ diss track

MANHATTAN (CN) — A federal judge on Thursday dismissed a stunning defamation case brought by the rapper Drake against his own record label Universal Music Group, which he claims promoted his rival Kendrick Lamar’s hit 2024 song “Not Like Us” despite knowing the diss track contained slanderous falsehoods.

In a 38-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Jeannette Vargas found that, while the song accused Drake of being a “certified pedophile,” the statement is a “nonactionable opinion” that cannot be scrutinized in court.

“The issue in this case is whether ‘Not Like Us’ can reasonably be understood to convey as a factual matter that Drake is a pedophile or that he has engaged in sexual relations with minors,” Vargas wrote. “In light of the overall context in which the statements in the recording were made, the court holds that it cannot.”

The Joe Biden appointee kicked off her dismissal order by breaking down the “vitriolic war of words” that erupted between Drake and Lamar — who are both signed to Universal — in the spring of 2024. Throughout the just over two-week feud, the duo released eight tracks packed with “heated rhetoric, loaded accusations and violent imagery.”

“The penultimate song of this feud, ‘Not Like Us’ by Kendrick Lamar, dealt the metaphorical killing blow,” Vargas wrote. “The song contains lyrics explicitly accusing Drake of being a pedophile, set to a catchy beat and propulsive bassline. ‘Not Like Us’ went on to become a cultural sensation, achieving immense commercial success and critical acclaim.”

It wasn’t until early 2025 that Drake, listed in the lawsuit as Aubrey Drake Graham, brought a civil complaint to the Southern District of New York, where he accused Universal of deploying “bots” to artificially boost the streaming figures of the supposedly defamatory song on Spotify and engaging in old-school “payola” — paying radio stations for airplay — which is illegal under Federal Communications Commission regulations.

Drake and his legal team scrutinized lyrics from “Not Like Us” that referred to him as “Malibu’s most wanted” and a “predator” whose name should “be registered and placed on neighborhood watch.” Those claims were further amplified in February, when Lamar performed the track at the NFL Super Bowl at the Caesars Superdome in New Orleans.

But since these accusations were made in a song, “in particular a rap ‘diss track,’” Vargas ruled that it cannot be held to the same standard as a piece of journalism, for example.

“The average listener is not under the impression that a diss track is the product of a thoughtful or disinterested investigation, conveying to the public fact-checked verifiable content,” she wrote.

Additionally, Vargas acknowledged that Drake engaged in much of the same name-calling in his own tracks from the rap beef, like in the song “Family Matters,” where Drake was “heavily implying that Lamar is a domestic abuser” and rapped that he “heard” one of Lamar’s sons may not be biologically his.

Drake’s claim that Universal artificially boosted the song’s popularity “fares no better,” the judge ruled. He argued that because “Not Like Us” was the fastest song to reach 300 million streams on Spotify — doing so in just 45 days — the court should infer that Universal manipulated streaming totals.

“The court disagrees,” Vargas wrote, critiquing Drake’s reliance on online comments and unverified reporting to make the claim.

“A small sample of users’ possible experience, communicated through tweets and other anonymized commentary, fails to establish a plausible inference that UMG manipulated listeners into streaming ‘Not Like Us’ instead of Drake’s music,” she added.

The case will now head to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, where a spokesperson for Drake told Courthouse News that he will be challenging the ruling.

A spokesperson for Universal Music Group said it was pleased with Vargas’ order.

“From the outset, this suit was an affront to all artists and their creative expression and never should have seen the light of day,” the spokesperson said in a statement. “We’re pleased with the court’s dismissal and look forward to continuing our work successfully promoting Drake’s music and investing in his career.”

Follow @Uebey Follow @uebey.bsky.social