Drake’s Kendrick Lamar lawsuit is absolutely ridiculous
Drake and Kendrick Lamar’s epic diss track battle from earlier this year was one for the history books. By all accounts, with the release of the absolutely blistering “Not Like Us” on May 4, 2024, Kendrick won. Now, you might guess that Drake didn’t take the defeat well, and you’d be right.
Drake’s estate has announced two separate lawsuits against Universal Music Group, alleging they illegally boosted “Not Like Us” on Spotify and iHeart Radio—and that this inflated airplay is defamation.
The internet’s initial reaction is that Drake’s lawsuits are petty, the final recourse of an artist unable to face down Kendrick directly. They make Drake look like a sore loser. As it turns out, though, the longer you sit with the news, the more ridiculous these lawsuits become.
A quick summarization of the news
In “Not Like Us,” Kendrick Lamar dug into his previous singles’ accusations that Drake is a pedophile, rapping, “Say, Drake, I hear you like ’em young / You better not ever go to cell block one.” While Kendrick’s accusations haven’t been verified, Drake’s predatory history with teens has earned him scrutiny before.
Drake’s response, “The Heart Part 6,” essentially flopped, with the bizarre, nonsensical defense that Drake was too famous to be a pedophile. (Ever heard of Harvey Weinstein or P. Diddy, my guy?)
And that was that, until now. On November 25, Drake took legal action against Universal Music Group (UMG), accusing them of artificially inflating the popularity of “Not Like Us” on Spotify. The following day, Drake filed a second action against UMG, this time accusing them of a “pay-to-play scheme” to augment “Not Like Us” on iHeart Radio.
The iHeart Radio filing tells us all what this is really about—Drake seems to be working towards a defamation claim. “UMG designed, financed, and then executed a plan to turn ‘Not Like Us’ into a viral mega-hit with the intent of using the spectacle of harm to Drake and his businesses to drive consumer hysteria and, of course, massive revenues,” Drake’s lawyers write.
But here’s the thing: Kendrick has been associated with UMG his entire career. UMG is also Drake’s label. In fact, Drake has spent his entire music career under UMG, too.
Drake is essentially accusing UMG of boosting Kendrick’s career at the expense of his own. Why would UMG benefit from tanking an artist they’ve invested many years and many millions of dollars in? What is this, The Producers?!
Too big to fail
You might almost feel bad for Drake. Almost. From these lawsuits, it feels like the man’s desperately looking for any kind of pat on the back, telling him he’s a good boy and that Kendrick Lamar’s just a meanie no one actually likes, Drake’s own rich history of disses be damned.
But as a smaller artist reading these lawsuits, the sympathy falls even shorter. Of course, UMG has deals with Spotify and iHeart Radio to pump up their artists’ big tracks. That’s what major record labels do. And those kinds of deals have absolutely benefitted Drake in the past.
Drake is alleging that “Not Like Us” only got popular because UMG pumped money into streaming and airplay. But most people became aware of “Not Like Us” because it blew up on social media. And then it got airplay. Why wouldn’t a popular track be promoted? It’s business 101.
There’s also the indignation of Drake, one of the biggest musical artists on planet Earth, essentially bemoaning he’s somehow not big enough. Spotify’s entire business practice is siphoning off traffic and—as of this year—entirely cutting off funding from smaller artists. The only artists who can make anything off of Spotify are mega-stars like Drake and Kendrick. The algorithm is biased towards them, too.
UMG and Spotify have actively promoted Drake’s career in the past in all the ways he’s currently complaining that “Not Like Us” has been artificially pushed. So Drake isn’t happy with how the industry benefitting him isn’t benefitting him in the way he wants anymore? Because of the quality of his musical output? That’s showbiz.
Shooting himself in the foot
Legal petitions like the ones Drake is leveling against UMG are only happening because, simply put, Drake’s response to Kendrick’s track fell short. Kendrick won, and this is how Drake is dealing with it. The outcome is almost certainly going to be that UMG did nothing out of their ordinary practices, which essentially means the world will have legal confirmation that Kendrick won the battle. Drake is asking to get defeated again.
Drake’s in the headlines. At this point, it’s up to him what kinds of headlines they are.
Plus, the lawsuit itself proves how deeply Kendrick won. It says Drake suffered “economic harm” due to the battle. It says Drake has faced a character assassination that stuck. We’d all mostly moved on with our lives because we have short attention spans and the news cycle moves a mile a minute. These lawsuits actively brought the Drake and Kendrick feud back into the news cycle, and it’s not painting Drake in the most flattering light.
They don’t give Drake the moral high ground the way he supposedly imagines they will. They just make him look petty. A grown man has to learn to deal with defeat now and again.
Have a tip we should know? tips@themarysue.com
