Drake’s label files moves to dismiss defamation lawsuit over Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us,” says rapper: “Lost a rap battle he provoked”

The battle between rap heavyweights Drake and Kendrick Lamar has taken a legal turn, as Universal Music Group (UMG) has filed a motion to dismiss Drake’s defamation lawsuit over the viral diss track “Not Like Us.” The motion argues that Drake’s lawsuit is an attempt to “salve his wounds” after losing a rap battle he initiated, rather than a legitimate legal claim.

This legal clash raises crucial questions about the boundaries of artistic expression, corporate responsibility, and the influence of diss tracks in modern hip-hop. As the case develops, it could set significant legal precedents for how the music industry navigates public feuds and record label involvement in controversial content.

The Feud That Led to the Lawsuit

The bad blood between Drake and Kendrick Lamar has been brewing for years, but tensions escalated in early 2024. It all started when Lamar took aim at Drake in “Like That,” a track from Future and Metro Boomin’s collaborative album We Don’t Trust You.

Lamar’s fiery verse in the song was widely interpreted as a direct diss, sparking a back-and-forth battle between the two rap icons. Over the following months, both artists released a series of diss tracks targeting each other.

However, the most explosive moment came when Lamar dropped “Not Like Us” in May 2024. The track quickly went viral, racking up millions of streams and even winning a Grammy Award for Best Rap Performance. The song was a brutal takedown of Drake, with allegations that pushed the limits of rap feuds.

Drake’s Lawsuit Against Universal Music

In January 2025, Drake took the feud from the studio to the courtroom, filing a defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group (UMG) in New York.

Drake’s legal team accused UMG of:

• Approving and publishing “Not Like Us,” thereby endorsing its inflammatory claims.
• Launching a promotional campaign to amplify the song’s reach and maximize its commercial success.
• Spreading dangerous misinformation, with lyrics allegedly implying that Drake is a criminal.

The lawsuit argues that UMG crossed a line by actively supporting a song containing false and damaging allegations rather than merely distributing it as a record label. Drake’s legal team also claims that the song incited public outrage, which led to real-world consequences—including threats to his safety.

Universal Music’s Motion to Dismiss

UMG wasted no time responding to the lawsuit, filing a motion to dismiss the case in March 2025. The label’s response is as aggressive as the diss tracks themselves, dismissing Drake’s legal action as a reaction to losing a rap battle he started.

According to UMG’s legal team:

• Diss tracks are an essential part of hip-hop culture, and legal disputes over them could stifle artistic expression.
• Drake willingly participated in the feud, releasing his own diss tracks against Lamar before taking legal action.
• Rap lyrics should not be interpreted as literal statements, a stance Drake himself has supported in the past.

The motion also points out that in 2022, Drake signed a public petition against prosecutors using rap lyrics as legal evidence. UMG argues that his lawsuit contradicts this stance, as he is now attempting to use Lamar’s lyrics as the basis for a defamation claim.

“Drake was right then and is wrong now,” the motion states. “His lawsuit is no more than an attempt to save face for his unsuccessful rap battle with Lamar.”

The Legal Argument: Is “Not Like Us” Defamatory?

At the heart of the case is a legal debate over artistic expression and defamation.

UMG argues that “Not Like Us” is:

• A work of opinion and rhetorical hyperbole, not a statement of fact.
• A typical diss track in rap culture is meant to be provocative rather than legally actionable.
• Protected under the First Amendment, which safeguards artistic and satirical speech.

From a legal perspective, defamation lawsuits require the false statement to be presented as fact rather than opinion. Courts often rule that statements made in artistic works—especially in rap music—are protected as free speech.

UMG’s legal team insists that no reasonable person would interpret “Not Like Us” as a literal accusation, making Drake’s defamation claims weak.

Drake’s Counterargument: When Does Art Cross the Line?

Despite UMG’s arguments, Drake’s legal team is standing firm.

Drake’s attorney, Michael J. Gottlieb, issued a sharp response, stating:

“UMG wants to pretend this is about a rap battle to distract from a simple truth: a greedy company is finally being held accountable for profiting from dangerous misinformation.”

Drake’s lawyers argue that:

• UMG’s active promotion of “Not Like Us” went beyond artistic freedom and into reckless endorsement.
• The song’s lyrics incited real-world consequences, leading to safety concerns for Drake and his family.
• Record labels should be held responsible when they profit from inflammatory and harmful content.

Drake’s lawsuit contends that “Not Like Us” wasn’t just an artistic diss—it was a targeted smear campaign that spread falsehoods and endangered his well-being.

How This Case Could Shape Hip-Hop and the Music Industry

This lawsuit has massive implications for both hip-hop culture and the music industry as a whole.

1. Defining the Limits of Diss Tracks

If Drake’s lawsuit succeeds, it could set a precedent for holding artists and record labels legally accountable for their tracks. This could change the way rap beef is handled, discouraging extreme accusations in lyrical battles.

On the other hand, if UMG wins, the case could reinforce the idea that DJ tracks are protected as free speech, allowing artists to continue pushing boundaries.

2. Record Label Accountability

Drake’s lawsuit also raises questions about how record labels promote controversial music. If UMG is found liable for defamation, labels may become more cautious about backing diss tracks—especially if they contain inflammatory allegations.

This could lead to stricter industry regulations on how labels promote music that involves personal attacks.

3. The Future of Legal Battles in Music

Rap battles have always been about competition, but this case introduces a new dynamic: taking feuds from the mic to the courtroom.

If Drake succeeds, it might encourage other artists to pursue legal action over his tracks, shifting the way hip-hop rivalries are settled.

What’s Next?

As of now, the court has not ruled on UMG’s motion to dismiss. The case is still in its early stages, and both sides are preparing for further legal battles.

The music industry is watching closely, as the outcome could reshape the boundaries between artistic expression and defamation.

Final Thoughts

The Drake vs. Kendrick Lamar feud has already made history in hip-hop, but its legal ramifications could have an even bigger impact.

If UMG succeeds in dismissing the lawsuit, it will reinforce artistic freedom and the tradition of diss tracks in rap. If Drake’s claims hold up, it could introduce new legal standards for the responsibility of artists and record labels.

Either way, this case marks a turning point for how the music industry handles rap battles, free speech, and legal liability.

One thing is certain: the drama between Drake and Kendrick Lamar is far from over—both in the studio and in the courtroom.