Drake takes Universal Music Group back to court over ‘Not Like Us’

Drake challenges Universal Music Group

Drake is taking Universal Music Group to court over Kendrick Lamar’s diss track, Not Like Us. In his complaint, Drake alleges that UMG promoted the song in ways that amplified what he says were false and harmful statements about him.

The Toronto rapper’s previous lawsuit was dismissed, but he is now appealing the decision. His legal team argues the original ruling misinterpreted the nature of the lyrics as fact versus artistic expression.

Background on the original lawsuit

Drake filed the initial complaint in January, accusing UMG of defamation and harassment. The suit centered on a line in Not Like Us, labeling him a ‘certified pedophile’.

He argued that UMG’s involvement amplified the song’s reach, causing reputational harm. The case drew attention to how labels handle high-profile rap disputes.

Dismissal by the district court

In October, U.S. District Judge Jeannette Vargas dismissed the case, ruling that the lyrics could not reasonably be interpreted as statements of fact. She determined that the language used in the song fell within the realm of expressive speech rather than verifiable factual assertions.

Judge Vargas emphasized the broader context of a highly publicized rap feud between two prominent artists.

She explained that audiences are accustomed to exaggerated insults in diss tracks and would interpret the lyrics as artistic hyperbole rather than literal accusations meant to be taken as true.

The judge’s reasoning

The court described the dispute as a “war of words” under intense media scrutiny. Both artists used incendiary and offensive language throughout the seven-track battle.

Because of this context, the judge concluded that a reasonable listener would not take the lyrics as factual. This reasoning formed the basis of the dismissal.

Drake files an appeal

Drake filed an opening appellate brief on January 21. He seeks to overturn the dismissal, claiming the lyrics presented an “unambiguous matter of fact.”

His legal team argues that labeling him a “certified pedophile” exceeds artistic insult. They insist it should be treated as a verifiable statement with real-world implications.

Argument on broader implications

Drake also challenges the precedent set by the dismissal, arguing that it grants artists and record labels near-total immunity for potentially harmful statements in diss tracks.

He warns that such a standard could allow serious allegations to circulate widely without accountability, regardless of their real-world consequences.

The appeal questions whether current legal protections for artistic expression are being applied too broadly in modern music disputes.

Context of diss tracks

Rap diss tracks often use exaggerated insults and provocative language designed to spark attention and fuel competition. Audiences generally understand these lyrics as part of hip-hop tradition and entertainment, not as literal or verified statements about real events or actions.

Drake’s legal team argues that certain lines go beyond artistic expression and amount to factual assertions. This distinction, they say, is central to the appellate argument and how the lyrics should be interpreted in a legal context.

UMG’s expected defense

Universal Music Group is likely to argue that the lyrics are protected as artistic expression rather than literal statements of fact.

The company may emphasize the long-standing conventions of rap music, in which exaggerated language is commonly used in public feuds and creative rivalry.

UMG has until March 27 to file its official response in the case. Legal observers expect the label to reinforce the argument that the lyrics function as hyperbole, a point they are likely to stress clearly in upcoming court filings.

Media and public reaction

The lawsuit has attracted widespread attention online and in entertainment media. Fans and analysts debate whether diss tracks should ever be actionable as defamation.

This case is part of a broader conversation on social media about accountability in the music industry. Many see it as a clash between artistry and personal reputation.

Legal stakes for artists

The appeal could affect how courts interpret statements made within diss tracks and other competitive music formats. A favorable ruling for Drake might redefine the legal boundaries between factual claims and artistic exaggeration in lyrical content.

The outcome may also influence how record labels approach the promotion of controversial songs. Artists could gain more leverage in disputes involving lyrics that are argued to harm reputations or invite legal scrutiny.

Cultural significance

Not Like Us became a viral cultural moment in the ongoing feud between Drake and Kendrick Lamar. Its lyrics and performance drew significant attention across streaming and social media platforms.

The lawsuit emphasizes the impact such tracks can have beyond entertainment. It raises questions about labels’ responsibility in amplifying potentially defamatory content.

Next legal steps

The appellate court will review Drake’s filing and UMG’s upcoming response. Legal analysts anticipate several rounds of briefs before any hearing or ruling.

While appellate litigation can take months, many observers are already asking how a ruling might alter how courts treat lyrics in public disputes.

And that context makes Drake’s reaction to Serena Williams’ halftime comment all the more interesting and significant. Observers are noting how the ongoing legal debate over diss track lyrics intersects with his public responses.

Public conversation continues

Drake’s challenge has sparked debate over artistic freedom and accountability. Fans and critics are closely following the appellate proceedings for potential precedent.

The case highlights the intersection of music, reputation, and law in the streaming era. It remains one of the most talked-about legal disputes in hip-hop culture today.

Universal Music Group hasn’t publicly filed a defense yet, keeping the case under close watch, kind of like how Drake Bell recently pointed out that most Nickelodeon stars don’t even get residuals for their shows.

What do you think about Drake’s renewed lawsuit against Universal Music Group and the claims around Not Like Us? Share your perspective in the comments!

This slideshow was made with AI assistance and human editing.

Don’t forget to follow us for more exclusive content right here on MSN.

Read More From This Brand:

• Drake’s Perth Concert: Measles Alert Issued
• Drake Drops Legal Action vs. Spotify, UMG
• Drake Fires Back After Lamar’s Grammy Triumph