Recommended Free Tools
Drake’s defamation lawsuit over Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us” was dismissed by a federal judge, who held that listeners would understand the song and its imagery as opinion in the context of a rap battle—not as statements of objective fact. Drake appealed, challenging how the court reached that conclusion. The latest appellate reporting reviewed here described the appeal as pending, but its status should be checked against the Second Circuit docket.
What did Drake sue UMG over?
In Graham v. UMG Recordings, Inc., No. 1:25-cv-00399-JAV, Drake (Aubrey Drake Graham) sued UMG Recordings, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. His amended complaint alleged that UMG published and promoted Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us,” along with its associated artwork and video, while knowing that the song’s implications about Drake were false. Those were Drake’s allegations, not findings that the accusations were true or that UMG knew them to be false.
| # | Preview | Product | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
![Take Care[2 LP]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51BLpSt6DqL._SL160_.jpg)
|
Take Care[2 LP] | $34.70 | Buy on Amazon |
| 2 |
|
$ome $exy $ongs 4 U | $41.99 | Buy on Amazon |
| 3 |
![Views [2 LP]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51-R8-6UkEL._SL160_.jpg)
|
Views [2 LP] | $36.54 | Buy on Amazon |
| 4 |
![If You're Reading This It's Too Late[2 LP]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41cCGlO56wL._SL160_.jpg)
|
If You're Reading This It's Too Late[2 LP] | $26.59 | Buy on Amazon |
| 5 |
![Scorpion [2 LP]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41YkXKImFnL._SL160_.jpg)
|
Scorpion [2 LP] | $40.00 | Buy on Amazon |
The complaint pleaded defamation, second-degree harassment and a violation of New York General Business Law § 349. Lamar was not a defendant in this lawsuit.
Why did the judge dismiss the case?
The court assessed the song in context
On October 9, 2025, U.S. District Judge Jeannette A. Vargas granted UMG’s motion to dismiss. The central defamation question was whether a reasonable listener could take “Not Like Us” to assert as fact that Drake was a pedophile or had engaged in sexual relations with minors. Judge Vargas held that, considering the full context, a reasonable listener could not.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minute2Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems3Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches#1 Best Overall
- Take Care is the 8x platinum-certified sophomore album from Drake
The opinion considered the heated exchange between the artists, the songs’ relationship to one another and the conventions of diss tracks. It also pointed to the work’s profanity, trash talk, violent imagery and hyperbole, which differ from the presentation of factual reporting. The court treated the associated artwork and video as figurative expression in that context as well. Its conclusion was case-specific: it did not establish that rap lyrics, or diss tracks generally, can never be defamatory.
Judge Vargas wrote: “The Court holds, based upon a full consideration of the context in which ‘Not Like Us’ was published, that a reasonable listener could not have concluded that ‘Not Like Us’ was conveying objective facts about Drake.” The opinion also invoked the principle that “only assertions of facts are capable of being proven false” when explaining the distinction between fact and opinion.
Rank #2
- Released: 05/09/2025
- Format: Vinyl
The other claims were dismissed too
The court dismissed the harassment claim because it found no civil cause of action under the pleaded theory, including no private right of action under the cited criminal statute. It also found Drake’s allegations insufficient to support his § 349 claim, including the alleged factual basis for consumer-oriented deceptive conduct. These are the district court’s rulings on the claims as pleaded in this case.
What are Drake and UMG arguing on appeal?
Drake appealed the dismissal. Appellate coverage by Music Business Worldwide on April 21, 2026, described his reply brief as asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to reverse. Drake’s lawyers reportedly argue that the district court relied on material outside the complaint, weighed evidence and drew inferences against him. They also argue that the court should have converted the motion into a summary-judgment proceeding and challenge its reliance on the broader rap-battle context.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEFix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Rank #3
- Views is the 8x platinum-certified fourth studio album from Drake
UMG’s position, as summarized in the same reporting, is that the challenged words must be read in context and that diss tracks signal opinion rather than fact. That is the company’s advocacy, not a ruling by the Second Circuit.
| Perspective | Position on context and procedure |
|---|---|
| Drake’s appellate position | His lawyers contend the district court improperly considered material beyond the complaint, drew adverse inferences and misused the broader rap-battle context. |
| UMG’s appellate position | UMG argues the lyrics must be read in context and maintains that diss tracks signal opinion rather than fact. |
| District court’s ruling | Judge Vargas held that a reasonable listener would not understand the song as conveying objective facts about Drake when considered in its full context. |
The court’s dismissal is not an appellate affirmance. LegalClarity reported that briefing was complete, that no oral-argument date had been publicly scheduled, and that the docket information it reviewed showed activity through June 12, 2026. The latest reviewed reporting therefore described the appeal as pending; those reports do not establish whether the docket has changed since.
Rank #4
- If You're Reading This It's Too Late is the fourth mixtape from Drake
What do legal observers say?
Ken White on the choice to sue UMG
First Amendment litigator Ken White told the Los Angeles Times that Lamar’s Super Bowl performance was unlikely to change much about Drake’s effort to sue UMG, noting that Drake had chosen to sue the label rather than Lamar. White said, “There’s a risk, but it appears to be low because of the way that Drake has decided to do this.” That is White’s assessment, not a court conclusion about the lawsuit or the appeal.
Loeb & Loeb’s explanation of the opinion analysis
Attorneys Tal Dickstein, a partner, and Jennifer Kahn, an associate, of Loeb & Loeb summarized the court’s fact-versus-opinion analysis around the language’s precision, whether it could be proved true or false, and the full circumstances in which it appeared. Their account highlights the court’s attention to forum, tone, language and apparent purpose. It is a law-firm analysis of the ruling, not a separate judicial decision.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Best Value
- Scorpion is the 7x platinum-certified fifth studio album from Drake
What do the stream count and rap-battle timeline establish?
The district court described the feud as involving eight diss tracks over 16 days. Its order also recited a figure of more than 1.4 billion Spotify streams globally as of April 2025. That stream count came from Drake’s amended complaint; it was not an independently audited count by Spotify or the court. The figure describes the scale alleged in the pleading, not proof that the song’s statements were factual or that UMG acted with knowledge of falsity.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
