Judge dismisses Drake’s defamation and harassment lawsuit over Kendrick Lamar’s diss track ‘Not Like Us’

A short excerpt from Justice Jeannete Vargas’ long opinion in Graham v. UMG Recordings, Inc.; read the full review to find out more:

This case stems from perhaps the most infamous rap battle in the genre’s history, the vitriolic war of words that broke out between superstar artists Aubrey Drake Graham (“Drake”) and Kendrick Lamar Duckworth (“Lamar” or “Kendrick Lamar”) in the spring of 2024. Over the course of 16 days, the two artists released eight so-called “diss tracks,” with increasingly passionate pieces. rhetoric, charged accusations and violent images. The penultimate song in this feud, Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us,” delivered the metaphorical deathblow. The song features lyrics explicitly accusing Drake of being a pedophile, over a catchy beat and propulsive bassline. “Not Like Us” became a cultural sensation, achieving immense commercial success and critical acclaim.

Here are the relevant lyrics cited in “Not Like Us”, although there are other songs cited during the rap battle:

Say, Drake, I heard you like ’em young
You better never go to cell block 1

To all the bitches who talk to him and who are in love
Just make sure you hide your little sister from him.
They tell me Chubbs is the only one who has your hands.
And PARTY at the party, playing with his nose now
And Baka has a weird case, why is he there?
Certified Lover Boy? Certified pedophiles

Wop, wop, wop, wop, wop, Dot, fuck them
Wop, wop, wop, wop, wop, I’m gonna do my thing
Why are you trolling like ab****? Aren’t you tired?
I’m trying to strike a chord and it’s probably A minor

Return to the opinion extract:

Both Drake and Kendrick Lamar have recording contracts with defendant UMG Recordings, Inc. (“UMG” or “Defendant”). Drake alleges that UMG intentionally released and promoted “Not Like Us” despite knowing that the song’s insinuations about him having sex with minors were false and defamatory.

(I.) Defamation Claims

…The question in this case is whether “Not Like Us” can reasonably be interpreted to mean factually that Drake is a pedophile or that he has had sex with minors. In light of the general context in which the statements contained in the recording were made, the Court finds that it cannot.,,,

The forum here is a musical recording, specifically a rap “diss track”, accompanied by a video and album art. The discussion tracks are much more akin to forums like YouTube and The average listener does not get the impression that a dissident piece is the product of thoughtful or disinterested investigation, conveying verifiable and verified content to the audience….

The fact that the recording was made in the middle of a rap battle is (also) essential to assess its impact on a reasonable listener….

That the recording can only reasonably be understood as opinion is reinforced by the language used in the song. “Vague, figurative or hyperbolic statements, even if disapproving of the complainant” and “imaginative expressions” cannot constitute actionable defamation….

(II.) Harassment in the second degree

New York does not recognize a civil cause of action for harassment. Notwithstanding this precedent, Plaintiff seeks to bring a charge of harassment under New York Penal Code section 240.26(3). A person commits harassment in the second degree when he or she “intends to harass, annoy, or alarm another person” and “engages in conduct or repeatedly commits acts that seriously alarm or annoy that other person and which serves no legitimate purpose.” The plaintiff alleges that the recording, video, and image “individually and collectively provide a call to target Drake, including through violence,” and that “defendant’s conduct in posting specific and unequivocal threats of violence placed the plaintiff in reasonable fear of physical harm.” This state criminal law, however, does not provide a private right of action. As a result, the plaintiff fails to file a harassment complaint….

(III.) Section 349 of the General Business Law of the State of New York

Plaintiff’s latest cause of action, brought under Section 349 of the New York General Business Law (“GBL”), fares no better. Section 349 prohibits “deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any business, trade or commerce or in the provision of any service.” The plaintiff alleges that, “based on information and belief,” the defendant “engaged in deceptive acts and practices in the conduct of business and commerce by covertly financially inducing third parties, including music platforms and social media influencers, to perform, distribute, and promote the recording.” »…

While these covert practices of providing financial incentives to undisclosed third parties and exploiting business relationships, if they exist, may be facts that are “particularly in the possession and control” of UMG, the plaintiff’s allegations – based on what amounts to unreliable online comments – do not constitute a “sufficient factual basis for there to be a “reasonable expectation that discovery will reveal evidence of illegality”. provides no facts or circumstances that would make it “highly plausible” that UMG conducted such covert business tactics.

Even though the Court accepted Plaintiff’s arguments regarding information and belief, Plaintiff has still not filed for relief under Section 349. Plaintiff has not adequately alleged deceptive consumer-oriented practices. “Under New York law, the term ‘consumer’ is consistently associated with an individual or natural person who purchases goods, services, or goods primarily for personal, family, or household purposes.” …

The amended complaint does not address how the deceptive practices allegedly used by UMG harmed consumers. For example, the amended complaint does not allege that consumers paid more than they otherwise would have for a product, purchased a product they otherwise would not have due to misrepresentations regarding the product, or otherwise received less value for purchases they made….

Nicholas Primer Crowell and Rollin A. Ransom (Sidley Austin LLP) represent UMG.