Hip-hop heavyweight Drake has escalated his ongoing legal war with Universal Music Group (UMG), claiming that the label’s promotion of Kendrick Lamar’s chart-topping diss track “Not Like Us” has caused severe and lasting damage to his personal and professional reputation—especially after the song’s high-profile exposure during the Super Bowl and the Grammy Awards.
The Canadian rapper, whose real name is Aubrey Graham, filed an amended complaint in a New York federal court on Wednesday, arguing that the repeated public amplification of Lamar’s track—through widely viewed events such as the Grammys and the Super Bowl halftime show—helped spread a narrative that he says is not only false but malicious.
“The Recording was broadcast, streamed, and discussed in connection with prestigious and high-exposure events,” the lawsuit states. “These events introduced new listeners to the defamatory content, reigniting public scrutiny and inciting further threats.”
Drake’s legal team highlighted that Lamar’s performance during the 2025 Super Bowl, which attracted an audience of 133.5 million viewers according to the Associated Press, contributed to a spike in both streaming numbers for “Not Like Us” and threats directed at Drake and his family. “Not only did streams of the Recording increase significantly following these two mega-cultural events, but threats against Drake and his family did as well,” the complaint emphasizes.
The controversy stems from the brutal lyrical war that unfolded in early 2024 between Drake and Lamar, both signed to different divisions of UMG. Lamar’s diss track “Not Like Us” became a viral sensation and a cultural lightning rod, topping charts and sparking heated debate within the hip-hop community and beyond. The track featured inflammatory lyrics that labeled Drake as a “certified pedophile” and a “predator” who “should be placed on neighborhood watch”—phrases that Drake’s camp insists are slanderous and dangerous.
“UMG didn’t just allow this track to circulate—they promoted it, celebrated it, and in doing so, endorsed a malicious narrative that has had very real consequences,” said a source close to Drake’s legal team. “This isn’t about hurt feelings from a rap battle. It’s about reputational damage at a global scale.”
Drake originally filed his lawsuit in January 2025, accusing Universal Music Group of defamation for supporting what he described as a “false and damaging portrayal” of his character. The lawsuit claims UMG “leveraged its platform and resources to amplify a harmful message under the guise of musical expression.”
UMG, however, responded in March by filing a motion to dismiss the case, arguing that the lawsuit was baseless and an effort by Drake to “save face” after losing a public feud. In their motion, UMG’s attorneys stated, “Drake’s claims are no more than an attempt to rewrite history following an unsuccessful lyrical exchange with Kendrick Lamar. Diss tracks are part of hip-hop culture. Courts cannot be used to litigate artistic rivalries.”
But Drake’s amended complaint goes further, tying the alleged harm to the song’s increased visibility thanks to Lamar’s cultural dominance in early 2025. The filing notes that Lamar won five Grammy Awards in February—including Best Rap Song and Best Performance—and followed it up by headlining the NFL’s Super Bowl halftime show just a week later.
Interestingly, Lamar chose to omit the word “pedophile” during his Super Bowl performance of “Not Like Us,” a move that Drake’s legal team suggests was intentional and telling. “Even Lamar recognized the gravity of his own lyrics when faced with a mainstream television audience,” the filing reads. “Yet the damage had already been done—and continues to reverberate.”
This legal face-off marks a rare moment in music history, where the lines between performance art, corporate responsibility, and personal reputation have clashed on a global stage. While diss tracks have long been a staple of hip-hop culture, Drake’s lawsuit challenges the notion that labels and broadcasters can remain neutral or uninvolved when inflammatory content crosses into potential defamation.
“Artists have always used music as a battleground, but in today’s digital age—where a song can be heard by millions instantly—the consequences are far greater,” said entertainment lawyer Rachel Steinberg, who is not affiliated with the case. “If Drake succeeds, it could set a new precedent for how labels handle the fallout from lyrical feuds.”
Neither Kendrick Lamar nor UMG has issued a public statement in response to the updated lawsuit. Legal analysts expect UMG to double down on its motion to dismiss, citing First Amendment protections and the historical context of diss tracks within the rap genre.
Still, the impact of this feud continues to ripple across the industry. Social media remains flooded with debates over artistic freedom, accountability, and the legal limits of lyrical expression. Meanwhile, both Drake and Lamar remain silent in the public arena, choosing to let their legal teams—and their music—do the talking.
As the case proceeds through the courts, one thing is clear: the battle between two of hip-hop’s biggest titans is no longer confined to the studio—it’s being fought in the courtroom, with billions of streaming ears watching.
