In January 2025, the popular Canadian rapper, Drake, filed a complaint in a New York federal court against Universal Music Group Recordings (“UMG”).
This complaint follows a series of “diss tracks” exchanged between Drake and West Coast rapper Kendrick Lamar in the summer of 2024, followed by a series of verified petitions filed by Drake in late November 2024. The diss track at the center of the lawsuit, “Not Like Us,” was released by Kendrick last summer and quickly climbed the charts to become one of the most streamed songs of the year. Not Like Us also won several Grammy awards in the 2024 season. On Not Like Us, Kendrick alleged that Drake and his acquaintances are sexual predators. Additionally, the cover art featured an image of Drake’s Toronto home covered in icons associated with identification of the residences of registered sex offenders.
Drake has officially taken the conflict to court with his New York complaint. In addition to the overall buzz surrounding the beef, content creators and fans have reacted strongly to Drake “naming” popular streamers in his lawsuit against UMG, but many of these reactions have misunderstood the structure of a lawsuit. So, who are the parties actually being sued, and what does this mean for Drake, UMG, and content creators?
What Is a Complaint?
The first step in a lawsuit is to file a complaint, which creates the case in the court in which it is filed. A complaint is a statement, often made by a “Plaintiff,” (here, Drake) who alleges certain facts and argues that they are entitled to compensation or other legal action based on how the facts fit recognized legal claims. Complaints are primarily filed against a “Defendant,” (here, UMG), who is the person or entity from whom the Plaintiff is seeking compensation or legal action.
Complaints must be “served on” defendants to notify them of the lawsuit. This procedure known as “service of process” lets a defendant that they are being sued and why. Service of process can be accomplished through various methods of delivery depending on the jurisdiction, including personal service, service by mail, or in certain circumstances, service by publication. However, defendants may waive this formal service of process by signing a waiver and voluntarily acknowledging the lawsuit.
Who Did Drake Sue and What Is He Alleging?
Drake has sued UMG, alleging that by promoting Not Like Us, UMG published, promoted, exploited, and monetized allegations against Drake that it knew were false. The complaint asserts three legal claims against UMG: (1) Defamation and Defamation per se, (2) Harassment, and (3) Violation of the New York General Business Law.
Drake’s first claim asserts that by publishing Kendrick’s song, UMG played a role in causing and spreading the false and damaging allegations against him. The second claim contends that through the release of the song, UMG promoted calls for violence against Drake, resulting in a reasonable fear of physical harm. The third claim accuses UMG of engaging in deceptive business practices by financially incentivizing third parties to stream, play, and promote Kendrick’s song.
Drake’s lawsuit mentions high-profile streamers like Kai Cenat and RDC Gaming. However, these streamers are not the target of the lawsuit, but are rather mentioned in Drake’s description of facts that happened to involve those individuals. Specifically, Drake uses these facts to allege that by “whitelisting” Not Like Us (allowing content creators to play Kendrick’s song in full on their platforms), UMG profited from the song’s greater exposure. UMG mentioned Kai Cenat and RDC Gaming to argue that these creators could not have played the song without UMG granting them permission, which Drake alleges UMG did to amplify and profit from the song’s widespread dissemination.
What’s Next?
UMG has publicly denied Drake’s allegations, issuing a statement that refutes any wrongdoing related to the release and promotion of Not Like Us. As the lawsuit unfolds, we will watch how UMG’s legal team navigates these issues, especially after Kendrick’s Super Bowl performance where he performed the song. The broader implications of the suit could reshape how the law views rap battles that “go too far” and how the industry navigates artistic expression and liability.
Contributions to this blog by Lisann Ricketts.
