Drake has received permission to access sensitive documents from Universal Music Group (UMG) as part of his ongoing defamation lawsuit concerning Kendrick Lamar’s song “Not Like Us.”
The rapper, who claims the track spread a “false and malicious narrative” about him being a paedophile, had requested copies of Lamar’s recording contract, along with details on the salaries and bonuses of UMG’s senior executives.
This legal move marks a significant step forward in the defamation case, as Drake seeks to obtain evidence that he believes will support his allegations against the record company for their role in the controversy.
In his lawsuit, Drake accuses UMG of defamation by allowing Lamar’s song to be released and promoted, despite knowing that the lyrics contained false statements. Specifically, Lamar’s track allegedly refers to Drake and his entourage as “certified paedophiles” who should be “registered and placed on neighbourhood watch.”
The song has stirred up intense debate, leading to Drake’s legal team pushing for access to key documents that may shed light on UMG’s involvement and actions during the song’s production and distribution.
This includes asking for all contracts between Lamar and the record company, as well as financial records related to executive compensation, which Drake argues could reveal motivations behind the alleged defamatory campaign.
Last month, Universal attempted to have the case dismissed, describing Drake’s claims as “illogical” and arguing that they were an attempt to suppress Lamar’s creative expression. The label also sought to halt the discovery process, which involves the gathering of evidence, while awaiting the outcome of the dismissal motion.
However, in a ruling earlier this week, Judge Jeannette A. Vargas rejected Universal’s request and ordered that the discovery phase continue.
This decision is seen as a victory for Drake, whose legal team had argued that the requested documents could reveal vital information regarding UMG’s involvement in the song’s promotion.
Following the ruling, Michael Gottlieb, Drake’s lead lawyer, expressed his satisfaction with the judge’s decision, stating, “Now it’s time to see what UMG was so desperately trying to hide.”
The statement reflects the growing tension between the rapper and the record label, as Drake aims to uncover what he believes are the hidden motivations behind UMG’s handling of the song.
The requested documents, which include all contracts between UMG and Lamar and records of executive compensation since 2020, are expected to provide crucial insights into the financial and creative decisions that led to the release of “Not Like Us.”
UMG, in its defense, has raised objections to Drake’s requests, calling them both costly and time-consuming. The label described the process of gathering commercially sensitive information as an “undue burden,” especially considering the case could still be dismissed.
However, the court’s decision to allow discovery to continue means that UMG must now comply with the document requests unless a further legal challenge successfully halts the process. A hearing on the motion to dismiss the case is set for June 30, which could determine whether the case will move forward or be dismissed altogether.
The lawsuit comes at a time when Drake and Lamar’s longstanding feud has once again been thrust into the spotlight. The two artists have exchanged harsh words on several rap tracks, with tensions reaching a boiling point last year.
In one particularly contentious track, Drake accused Lamar of domestic abuse, which led to Lamar firing back with “Not Like Us.” In this response, Lamar’s lyrics directly targeted Drake and his associates, calling them paedophiles and questioning their morality.
The lyrical battle has now escalated into a full-blown legal dispute, with Drake seeking damages from UMG for its role in distributing Lamar’s controversial track.
In his legal filings, Drake claims that UMG was fully aware of the false nature of Lamar’s lyrics but continued to promote the song for commercial gain.
He also accuses the record label of colluding with streaming giant Spotify to artificially inflate the song’s streaming numbers, a claim that both companies have firmly denied.
While the defamation case focuses on the allegations made in “Not Like Us,” it also highlights the broader tensions within the music industry regarding how record labels and streaming platforms handle controversial content.
In response to Drake’s accusations, UMG has firmly rejected the claims and defended its actions. The label argues that the lawsuit is a direct attack on Lamar’s right to free speech and creative expression. UMG maintains that Drake, who has been signed to the label for over a decade, has always engaged in similar public feuds as part of the rap battle culture.
“Throughout his career, Drake has intentionally and successfully used UMG to distribute his music and poetry to engage in conventionally outrageous back-and-forth ‘rap battles,'” the label stated in its defense.
They further suggested that Drake’s current lawsuit was an attempt to “weaponize” the legal process in an effort to silence Lamar and obtain financial compensation.
Additionally, UMG accused Drake of trying to deflect blame for losing a rap battle that he had provoked. “He now seeks to weaponize the legal process to silence an artist’s creative expression and to seek damages from [Universal] for distributing that artist’s music,” the label said.
According to UMG, the current legal dispute is simply a continuation of the back-and-forth between two artists, each using music as a means of expressing their personal grievances. The label’s defense frames the situation as a part of the ongoing rap battle culture, where provocative lyrics and diss tracks are a common method of artistic expression.
Kendrick Lamar’s song “Not Like Us” has been a massive commercial success, becoming the biggest hit of his career. In the UK, it marked Lamar’s first number one single, and its popularity skyrocketed after Lamar performed it during the Super Bowl Halftime Show in February.
Despite the success, the song’s controversial lyrics have sparked widespread discussion, with many fans and critics taking sides in the ongoing feud between Lamar and Drake. The song’s commercial success has only added to the stakes of the lawsuit, as both artists continue to navigate the complex intersection of music, free speech, and legal battles.
As the legal proceedings unfold, the outcome of this case could have broader implications for the music industry, particularly in how record labels handle controversial content. For Drake, the case represents an effort to protect his reputation and seek justice for what he sees as harmful, defamatory content.
Whether or not the court will side with him remains to be seen, but the legal battle is likely to continue making headlines as it progresses toward a final resolution later this year.
