Drake Appeals Dismissal of Defamation Lawsuit Over Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us”
Drake has formally appealed the dismissal of his defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group, arguing that a federal judge’s ruling shielding Kendrick Lamar’s diss track “Not Like Us” sets a troubling legal precedent for the music industry.
In a 60-page appellate brief filed this week with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Drake contends that the lower court erred in concluding the song’s lyrics amounted to protected opinion rather than actionable defamation. The rapper maintains that the track asserts, as a matter of fact, that he is a “certified pedophile,” an allegation he says is demonstrably false and has caused him substantial reputational harm.
The appeal follows an October ruling by U.S. District Judge Jeannette A. Vargas, who dismissed Drake’s lawsuit at the pleading stage. Vargas determined that, when considered in context, the statements in “Not Like Us” were part of a broader lyrical exchange common to rap battles and would not be understood by a reasonable listener as factual claims. She characterized the song as an example of exaggerated and inflammatory rhetoric typical of the genre rather than a vehicle for verifiable accusations.
Drake’s legal team sharply disputes that conclusion. In the appellate filing, his attorneys argue that the district court effectively created a categorical exemption for rap diss tracks, insulating artists and record labels from defamation claims regardless of how explicit or damaging a lyric may be. Such a rule, the brief asserts, is “dangerous,” overly broad, and unsupported by defamation law.
According to Drake, the song’s repeated references to pedophilia, coupled with its widely circulated cover art and a later music video, reinforce a specific and false allegation that should be evaluated by a jury. The brief emphasizes that the meaning of the lyric is precise, easily understood by listeners, and capable of being proven true or false, the traditional test for defamatory statements under U.S. law.
Drake initially filed suit in January 2025, naming only Universal Music Group, the label that distributes music for both artists, rather than Lamar himself. He accused UMG of aggressively promoting the song in a manner that amplified its alleged defamatory message, misleading consumers and exacerbating the damage to his reputation. The complaint alleged that the label acted with knowledge of the harm the lyrics would cause or with reckless disregard for the truth.
Universal Music Group moved to dismiss the case, arguing that Drake had willingly participated in a highly publicized rap feud and that diss tracks are inherently expressive works understood as opinion, not fact. The label characterized the lawsuit as an attempt to relitigate a cultural loss rather than a legitimate legal grievance. The district court ultimately agreed, granting UMG’s motion.
The legal dispute arises from a highly visible series of musical exchanges between Drake and Lamar that escalated throughout spring 2024. The feud intensified after Drake released “Family Matters,” which included personal allegations about Lamar’s private life. Lamar responded with multiple tracks, culminating in “Not Like Us,” which quickly became a viral hit and a centerpiece of the cultural conversation.
The song’s success extended well beyond streaming platforms. “Not Like Us” went on to win Grammy Awards for both Record of the Year and Song of the Year and was later performed by Lamar during the Super Bowl halftime show, significantly increasing its exposure.
Universal Music Group has not yet publicly responded to Drake’s appellate filing. The label’s response brief is due later this month. The appeal now places the case before a higher court, where judges will assess whether the district court correctly applied defamation law or whether, as Drake argues, the ruling improperly forecloses accountability for false statements made in music.
