{"id":569247,"date":"2026-03-28T04:24:08","date_gmt":"2026-03-28T04:24:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/569247\/"},"modified":"2026-03-28T04:24:08","modified_gmt":"2026-03-28T04:24:08","slug":"drakes-label-fires-back-in-appeals-court-astoundingly-hypocritical","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/569247\/","title":{"rendered":"Drake’s Label Fires Back in Appeals Court: ‘Astoundingly Hypocritical’"},"content":{"rendered":"

\n\tUniversal Music Group is firing back at Drake<\/a> again, arguing in a new appellate brief that the rapper\u2019s attempt to revive<\/a> his failed defamation lawsuit over Kendrick Lamar<\/a>\u2019s \u201cNot Like Us\u201d is illogical and \u201castoundingly hypocritical.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tIn its new 83-page filing obtained by Rolling Stone, UMG<\/a> says the Canadian rapper born Aubrey Drake Graham is making arguments so flawed and \u201cnonsensical\u201d that he\u2019s attempting to \u201cturn the law upside down.\u201d The new brief, filed in the Second Circuit, argues U.S. District Judge Jeannette A. Vargas ruled correctly last October <\/a>when she concluded that Lamar\u2019s lyrics calling Drake a pedophile were \u201cnonactionable opinion,\u201d meaning not statements of fact.<\/p>\n

\n\tThe label says Drake clearly felt free to use UMG\u2019s platform to attack Lamar \u201cin equally incendiary terms\u201d when it suited him, but now he\u2019s seeking a different standard for the \u201cwords he now dislikes\u201d that were directed at him. \u201c[Drake] seeks to strip words from their context and deem them actionable defamation if anyone, anywhere, might treat them as factual. That is not the law, and Drake\u2019s view would critically undermine a highly creative art form built on exaggeration, insult, and wordplay,\u201d the new filing argues.<\/p>\n

\n\tIn her ruling dismissing Drake\u2019s lawsuit last fall, Judge Vargas found that Lamar\u2019s lyrics were delivered as a \u201cdirect callback to Drake\u2019s lyrics\u201d amid \u201ca heated rap battle with incendiary language and offensive accusations hurled by both participants.\u201d She determined a reasonable listener would conclude Lamar was \u201crapping hyperbolic vituperations,\u201d not \u201cverifiable facts.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cThe issue in this case is whether \u2018Not Like Us\u2019 can reasonably be understood to convey as a factual matter that Drake is a pedophile or that he has engaged in sexual relations with minors,\u201d Vargas wrote. \u201cIn light of the overall context in which the statements in the recording were made, the court holds that it cannot.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tThe\u00a0nine-track rap battle<\/a>\u00a0at the center of the legal war started making headlines in April 2024. It exploded when Drake released \u201cFamily Matters\u201d on May 3, 2024, accusing Lamar of domestic abuse and not being the father of one of his kids. Lamar responded with the back-to-back drops of \u201cMeet the Grahams\u201d and \u201cNot Like Us,\u201d with the latter\u2019s hook of \u201ccertified lover boy, certified pedophile\u201d becoming an instant and\u00a0viral sensation<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\t\tEditor\u2019s picks<\/p>\n

\n\tUMG says the court was correct to emphasize that the nine songs were \u201cin dialogue with one another.\u201d It notes that Lamar\u2019s line, \u201cSay, Drake, I hear you like \u2019em young,\u201d was an obvious response to Drake\u2019s lyrics in \u201cTaylor Made Freestyle,\u201d which taunted Lamar to repeat rumors that Drake had dated someone underage. \u201cTalk about him likin\u2019 young girls,\u201d Drake says in the track.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cAs much as Drake may dislike that context after the fact, it is fair game and critical to consider under New York law,\u201d UMG and its lawyers argue in the new filing. <\/p>\n

\n\tThe label also calls it \u201cnonsensical\u201d for Drake to argue that Lamar\u2019s lyrics could be defamatory because rap lyrics are sometimes admitted as evidence in criminal cases. UMG says that context, in which a jury is asked to make factual determinations under different legal standards, is distinct. In any event, the label notes, Drake signed a November 2022 petition criticizing prosecutors for treating artists\u2019 creative expression as fact.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cDrake\u2019s argument is also astoundingly hypocritical,\u201d the filing states. It cites the petition\u2019s claim that \u201cmore than any other art form, rap lyrics are essentially being used as confessions in an attempt to criminalize Black creativity and artistry,\u201d and that such use \u201cis un-American and simply wrong.\u201d The filing suggests Drake is now taking the opposite position to serve his interests.<\/p>\n

\t\tRelated Content<\/p>\n

\n\tIn his 60-page appeal brief in January, Drake renewed his argument that Lamar\u2019s track states, as a \u201cprecise\u201d and \u201cunambiguous matter of fact,\u201d that Drake is a \u201ccertified pedophile.\u201d He claimed UMG \u201crelentlessly\u201d marketed \u201cNot Like Us\u201d in a way that misled consumers and caused him serious harm. He said Lamar\u2019s lyrics are \u201ccapable of being proven true or false,\u201d so his lawsuit belongs in front of a jury.<\/p>\n

\n\tDrake and his lawyers further claimed the dismissal of his lawsuit could have far-reaching negative consequences by creating a \u201cdangerous categorical rule\u201d that would shield artists and labels from liability no matter how extreme or damaging their accusations might be. UMG responded Friday by claiming that argument \u201cblatantly mischaracterizes\u201d Judge Vargas\u2019 ruling.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cIt nowhere indicated that a diss track could never be defamatory; it simply recognized that the \u2018average listener\u2019 in this forum and \u2018common expectation\u2019 for statements in this forum were significant,\u201d UMG\u2019s filing says. \u201cIt held, including in light of those considerations, that this diss track could not be understood by a reasonable listener as conveying fact.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tDrake originally sued UMG in January 2025<\/a>, accusing the label of promoting Lamar\u2019s hit song in a way that \u201cintended to convey the specific, unmistakable, and false factual allegation that Drake is a criminal pedophile.\u201d He notably sued only the record label he shares with Lamar, not Lamar himself.<\/p>\n

\n\tUMG responded with a pair of scathing motions to dismiss<\/a> that ultimately prevailed. \u201cPlaintiff, one of the most successful recording artists of all time, lost a rap battle that he provoked and in which he willingly participated,\u201d lawyers for UMG wrote. \u201cInstead of accepting the loss like the unbothered rap artist he often claims to be, he has sued his own record label in a misguided attempt to salve his wounds.\u201d<\/p>\n

\t\tTrending Stories<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cNot Like Us\u201d went on to win Grammy Awards for Record and Song of the Year<\/a>, becoming only the third hip-hop song to win Record of the Year after Childish Gambino\u2019s \u201cThis Is America,\u201d and Lizzo\u2019s \u201cAbout Damn Time.\u201d Lamar also performed the song during the widely viewed 2025 Super Bowl halftime show<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\n\tDrake is expected to respond to UMG\u2019s new appellate filing with a reply brief due April 17.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Universal Music Group is firing back at Drake again, arguing in a new appellate brief that the rapper\u2019s…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":569248,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[28],"tags":[64,63,7882,19292,2905,134,21233,136,126027],"class_list":{"0":"post-569247","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-music","8":"tag-au","9":"tag-australia","10":"tag-controversy","11":"tag-courts-and-crime","12":"tag-drake","13":"tag-entertainment","14":"tag-kendrick-lamar","15":"tag-music","16":"tag-umg"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/569247","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=569247"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/569247\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/569248"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=569247"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=569247"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=569247"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}