Drake ‘Lost A Rap Battle,’ UMG Argues In Motion to Dismiss Suit

The legal battle between Drake and Universal Music Group (UMG) has taken another turn, with the label seeking to dismiss the rapper’s lawsuit.

The dispute centers around UMG’s role in promoting Kendrick Lamar’s diss track “Not Like Us,” which Drake claims led to harmful consequences.

However, UMG is pushing back, arguing that Drake’s claims are unfounded. The motion, filed earlier on Monday, challenged the legitimacy of Drake’s case, stating that it is merely an attempt to recover from a public defeat rather than a genuine legal grievance.

In its filingUniversal Music Group did not hold back in criticizing Drake’s legal move.

The label asserted that Drake “lost a rap battle that he provoked and in which he willingly participated,” arguing that instead of accepting the outcome, he resorted to legal measures to “salve his wounds.”

Furthermore, UMG accused Drake of contradicting his own stance on artistic freedom, pointing out that he had previously signed a petition condemning the use of rap lyrics in legal proceedings.

“Drake was right then and is wrong now,” the motion stated, reinforcing their claim that the lawsuit lacks merit.

In his lawsuit, Drake alleged that UMG’s involvement in promoting “Not Like Us” constituted defamation and harassment.

However, UMG argued that there is no legal basis for these claims, stating that the song expresses “nonactionable opinion and rhetorical hyperbole, not fact.”

The company also highlighted a perceived double standard, noting that while Drake expects support for his own diss tracks, he objects to a similar promotion of Lamar’s response.

The label insisted that their actions were within legal and ethical boundaries and that Drake’s claims failed to meet the necessary criteria to proceed in court.

Despite UMG’s attempt to dismiss the case, Drake’s legal team remains firm in their stance.

The rapper’s attorney, Michael J. Gottlieb, asserted that the lawsuit is about more than just a rap battle.

Gottlieb told Variety“UMG wants to pretend that this is about a rap battle in order to distract its shareholders, artists, and the public from a simple truth: a greedy company is finally being held responsible for profiting from dangerous misinformation that has already resulted in multiple acts of violence.”

He also suggested that UMG has a history of exploiting artists and that the case will reveal deeper systemic issues within the music industry.

Gottlieb said, “This motion is a desperate ploy by UMG to avoid accountability, but we have every confidence that this case will proceed and continue to uncover UMG’s long history of endangering, abusing and taking advantage of its artists.”

The lawsuit, submitted in a New York federal court, came after he withdrew a legal challenge accusing UMG and Spotify of artificially inflating the song’s popularity. UMG dismissed the claims as “illogical.”

The lawsuit alleged that UMG prioritized “corporate greed over the safety and wellbeing of its artists” by distributing “Not Like Us,” which labeled Drake a “certified pedophile.”

It claimed that UMG intentionally promoted the track to spread “false factual allegations” and incite harm against Drake.

The suit also highlighted the song’s artwork, which featured an image of Drake’s house marked similarly to the homes of registered sex offenders.

Drake’s legal team argued that UMG knowingly published and profited from false claims, holding the label responsible for the song’s impact.

“This lawsuit is not about the artist who created “Not Like Us,” the filing stated. “It is, instead, entirely about UMG, the music company that decided to publish, promote, exploit, and monetize allegations that it understood were not only false, but dangerous.”

However, UMG strongly denied the accusations, insisting they had significantly contributed to Drake’s success.

“Not only are these claims untrue, but the notion that we would seek to harm the reputation of any artist – let alone Drake – is illogical,” a spokesperson stated per the Guardian.

They also accused the “One Dance” crooner of “weaponizing the legal process to silence an artist’s creative expression” despite having benefited from the same industry practices throughout his career.