Drake has intensified his defamation suit against Universal Music Group, newly citing Kendrick Lamar’s Super Bowl LIX halftime show as pivotal to his claims. The amended filing, submitted this week, builds on Drake’s original January lawsuit by framing Lamar’s televised set as a turning point in the ongoing dispute. In a sharply worded court filing, Drake’s attorneys cited Kendrick Lamar’s historic halftime show as a calculated public spectacle, accusing the rapper of weaponizing “Not Like Us” before a record-breaking audience—many of them first-time listeners.
They argue that the performance ventured into unexplored legal territory, portraying it as an uncommon instance of character defamation on one of television’s most prestigious stages. The revised complaint highlights Kendrick’s choice to steer clear of the word “pedophile” in his performance—an omission Drake cites as bolstering his defamation case. It also points to Kendrick’s Grammy sweep for “Not Like Us,” emphasizing the track’s primetime reach to 15 million viewers, a level of visibility Drake argues was only possible through UMG’s tacit approval.
Drake softens bot claims as UMG pushes back, warning of legal fallout
Originally, Drake’s lawsuit accused UMG of employing bots to artificially inflate streaming numbers for “Not Like Us,” based on unverified statements from an anonymous source on a social media platform. However, in his revised claims, he has softened his stance regarding the bots, suggesting that UMG was aware of third-party manipulation and chose to ignore it, despite having the ability to intervene.
Drake’s legal representatives have expressed confidence in the amended complaint, stating, “This filing fortifies an already robust case. UMG’s public relations tactics and attempts to evade transparency cannot obscure the underlying facts.” They emphasized that as the legal process advances, evidence of UMG’s alleged misconduct will be unveiled, holding the label accountable for its decisions.
In response, UMG issued a detailed statement addressing the accusations, asserting that Drake, a highly successful artist with a 16-year collaborative history with the label, is being misguided by his attorneys. They remarked on the withdrawal of a prior legal petition filed in Texas, stating that Drake’s team had “quietly dropped” the case after an initial public announcement. UMG further criticized the amended defamation lawsuit, claiming it reflects a shift from earlier assertions made by Drake’s counsel, which they argue were baseless. They cautioned Drake, indicating that while he may celebrate minor legal victories, he could face significant repercussions if the lawsuit continues, warning that he would be subject to discovery processes.
Leave a Reply