Even if you’re not a hip-hop head, you’ve probably heard the infamous Drake vs. Kendrick Lamar feud that’s been percolating in the last year. What started as a few lyrical jabs quickly spiraled into a diss track arms race, peaking with the sonic nuke that was Kendrick’s “Not Like Us.” All of this eventually landed in court, and late last week, it finally came to a close as a federal judge dismissed all of Drake's claims. FindLaw fills you in on the legal saga of two of the biggest rappers in America.
Duckworth, Drake, Goose Chase
Perhaps ironically, both Drake and Kendrick started off birds of a feather, both assigned to Universal Music Group (UMG) through their respective label deals. Later, UMG (not Kendrick) would be the named defendant in Drake’s lawsuit.
According to the official court record, the drama went public in early 2024, though anyone who’s followed hip-hop gossip knows Drake and the Duckworth have been in a goose chase for glory much longer. Drake and J. Cole dropped “First Person Shooter,” Lamar fired back with “Like That,” Drake responded with “Push Ups” and “Taylor Made Freestyle,” poking Kendrick to answer and taking shots about, well, some very uncomfortable rumors. Kendrick didn’t let that slide — he came swinging with “Euphoria” and “6:16 in LA.” Then Drake dropped “Family Matters,” throwing out even nastier accusations about Lamar’s personal life. New diss tracks were landing every few days, sometimes hours apart, like punches in a title fight.
But the real explosion came with “Not Like Us.” Released in May 2024 by UMG, this was Kendrick’s way of finally setting the pecking order. It accused Drake of pedophilia (explicitly and repeatedly), and the visual storytelling matched the intensity. The cover art showed an aerial view of Drake’s mansion plastered with icons marking sex offenders’ homes, and the music video leaned into dark humor and biting symbolism: hopscotch squares, childlike imagery, and Kendrick gleefully smashing an owl piñata (a not-so-subtle dig at Drake’s OVO logo).
Of course, controversy sells. “Not Like Us” shattered records, drawing 13 million streams on its first day and nearly 100 million by week’s end. The song dominated social media, soundtracking everything from Super Bowl shows to campaign rallies, and swept nearly every Grammy for which it was nominated. By December 2024, it had become the defining pop‑culture moment of the year.
But according to Drake, the point wasn’t just to throw shade; it was defamation.
Lawsuit Gets Started (From the Bottom)
In January, Drake dragged the beef to federal court, accusing his own longtime record label of publishing, promoting, and monetizing the viral Kendrick song, which Drake claimed falsely accused him of being a pedophile and called for violence against him.
Drake alleged that UMG was motivated by financial interests and internal executive incentives to release and widely promote the track. He also claimed that the company engaged in deceptive business practices such as using bots to artificially inflate streaming numbers and paying for additional promotion, all while knowing the allegations in the song were false. He claimed that UMG’s actions caused him severe reputational, financial, physical, and emotional harm, and brought claims for defamation and harassment.
In March, UMG responded by filing a motion to dismiss. They argued that the statements in the song were “nonactionable opinion” and “rhetorical hyperbole,” typical of the diss track genre and the context of a public rap feud. UMG emphasized that such statements would not be understood by a reasonable listener as factual assertions, especially in the context of a heated artistic exchange.
UMG also pointed out that because Drake is a public figure, the legal bar for proving defamation is much higher. In plain terms, that means he needed to show that UMG acted with “actual malice” — basically, that the company knew the claims were false or recklessly ignored the truth. The court didn’t see enough evidence of that.
Judge Says Sit Down, Be Humble
As it turns out, Drake was making no new friends in court. Last week, U.S. District Court Judge Jeannette Vargas sided completely with UMG and threw out Drake’s defamation lawsuit.
Judge Vargas ruled that even though the claims in “Not Like Us” were harsh and attention-grabbing, they couldn’t reasonably be taken as literal facts. In other words, in the context of a rap battle — a world full of exaggeration, insults, and artistic bravado — average listeners would see the lyrics as opinion, not defamation. Under the First Amendment (which protects free speech) and New York law, that meant the song’s words were legally protected.
The judge also tossed out Drake’s harassment claim, explaining that New York doesn’t allow people to sue over that kind of harassment in civil court (it’s only a criminal offense, which has to be brought by the state government). As for Drake’s Section 349 claim, which accused UMG of unfair or deceptive business practices, the court said he didn’t back it up with enough solid facts or show how consumers were actually misled or harmed.
In short, the judge said Drake had definitely taken a hit to his reputation, but the law doesn’t give a remedy for hurt feelings when it’s clearly artistic expression.
Related Resources
- Judge Refuses To Vacate Sean Combs’ Conviction (FindLaw's Legally Weird)
- Copyright Challenge Against Ed Sheeran Strikes Wrong Chord With U.S. Supreme Court Justices (FindLaw's Legally Weird)
- It's Cut, Not Action, As Judge Dismisses Justin Baldoni's Lawsuit Against Blake Lively (FindLaw's Legally Weird)
