Drake Challenges Dismissal of Lawsuit Against Universal Music Group Over “Not Like Us” Promotion
Drake has officially taken steps to appeal the dismissal of his defamation and harassment lawsuit against Universal Music Group (UMG). The lawsuit accused UMG of unfairly promoting Kendrick Lamar’s viral diss track “Not Like Us” and manipulating its streaming numbers to damage Drake’s career. On October 29, his lawyers filed a notice of appeal, signaling their intent to challenge the earlier court decision. This filing marks a new phase in a dispute that has drawn widespread attention in both the music and legal industries.
Drake’s legal representatives confirmed that a detailed appeal will follow in a separate submission. They expressed confidence that the Court of Appeals will carefully review the arguments in the coming weeks. “This confirms our intent to appeal, and we look forward to the Court of Appeals reviewing that filing in the coming weeks,” Drake’s representatives told Variety. The OVO rapper has remained silent publicly but is reportedly determined to clear his name after months of controversy surrounding the track and its impact on his reputation.
The original lawsuit was dismissed on October 9 by Judge Jeannette Vargas, who ruled that Lamar’s lyrics did not meet the legal standard for defamation. The court found that “Not Like Us” was a product of rap competition and artistic expression rather than a literal or factual accusation. “The fact that [‘Not Like Us’] was made in the midst of a rap battle is essential to assessing its impact on a reasonable listener,” Judge Vargas wrote. Her decision effectively categorized the song as protected speech within the boundaries of hip-hop culture and lyrical rivalry.
Judge Vargas also referenced Drake’s earlier diss track “Taylor Made Freestyle,” which provoked Kendrick Lamar with the line urging him to “talk about [me] liking young girls.” Lamar’s response in “Not Like Us” included the taunt, “I heard you like ’em young,” which Drake cited as defamatory in his claim. The judge rejected that interpretation, stating the lyric was clearly a callback to Drake’s own words. “The similarity in the wording suggests strongly that this line is a direct callback to Drake’s lyrics in the prior song. A reasonable listener would conclude that Lamar is rapping hyperbolic vituperations,” she wrote.
After the dismissal, UMG welcomed the ruling and criticized Drake’s lawsuit as an attack on artistic freedom. A spokesperson for the company said the case should never have gone to court, calling it “an affront to all artists and their creative expression.” They added that UMG remains committed to supporting Drake’s music career despite the legal tensions. “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,” the spokesperson said.
Drake’s decision to appeal shows his commitment to pursuing the matter beyond the initial judgment. Legal analysts suggest that the appeal could clarify how courts interpret artistic intent in the context of music battles and public rivalry. The case has also sparked debate about the limits of defamation in art and whether streaming promotion practices can be legally challenged. As the appeal process unfolds, the outcome could set a significant precedent for the music industry and future lyrical disputes.
