Drake’s lawsuit against Universal Music Group (UMG) over Kendrick Lamar’s hit diss track “Not Like Us” just took another dramatic turn. UMG has officially asked a federal judge to pause all discovery in the case, arguing that the rapper is making unreasonable demands for confidential documents—including Lamar’s record deal and executive pay structures.
But Drake’s camp is not backing down, calling UMG’s request a “desperate” attempt to avoid handing over evidence. With legal tensions rising, the case raises broader questions about defamation in hip-hop, corporate accountability, and whether calling someone a “certified pedophile” in a diss track can be dismissed as just rap beef.
UMG Pushes to Halt Discovery, Calls Lawsuit “Meritless”
Following its motion to dismiss Drake’s lawsuit, UMG doubled down by requesting a stay on all discovery. The label argues that Drake’s legal team is demanding “highly commercially sensitive documents” that have no relevance to the case and could harm business operations. Among the materials Drake wants access to:
- Kendrick Lamar’s record contract with UMG
- Internal pay structure for top executives like Interscope CEO John Janick
- UMG’s communications regarding the promotion of “Not Like Us” on Spotify and Apple Music
- Discussions with the Recording Academy ahead of Lamar’s Grammy wins
- Any decisions to censor “Not Like Us” for the Super Bowl halftime show
UMG argues that if the lawsuit is dismissed, all these requests would be pointless. “Proceeding with discovery while the motion is pending would waste the parties’ resources and would constitute an undue burden,” the label stated in its filing.
Drake’s lawyer, Michael J. Gottlieb, fired back, claiming this was just a stalling tactic. “If UMG has nothing to hide, it should not have an issue with discovery,” he said.
Defamation or Just Rap Beef? Where’s the Line?
At the core of Drake’s lawsuit is the claim that UMG helped spread a “malicious narrative” about him, allowing Lamar’s diss track—which labels him a “certified pedophile”—to dominate streaming platforms and cultural conversations.
Lamar’s track, released during their 2024 feud, became an instant smash and was the centerpiece of his Super Bowl performance. Drake argues that UMG waged a campaign against its own artist, promoting a narrative it knew was false simply to profit from the beef.
This raises a bigger question: At what point do rap lyrics cross the line into defamation?
Historically, diss tracks thrive on exaggeration, with rappers throwing wild accusations at their rivals for entertainment. But calling someone a pedophile—a claim that could destroy reputations and livelihoods—is an allegation that many believe shouldn’t just be dismissed as lyrical warfare.
UMG is defending itself under First Amendment protections. The label warns that cases like this could lead to “meritless defamation claims” being used to silence artistic expression. The label also pointed out that courts have historically protected diss tracks as free speech. This means Drake faces an uphill battle.
The Bigger Picture: What’s Next?
The legal battle between Drake and UMG is far from over. While the label is fighting to dismiss the case and halt discovery, Drake’s team is pushing for full transparency.
If UMG’s motion is denied, the case could expose the inner workings of the music industry, including how labels handle artist feuds and what control they have over music promotion. If it’s dismissed, it will set a precedent that even extreme allegations in diss tracks fall under artistic freedom.
As the lawsuit unfolds, hip-hop fans and legal experts alike are watching closely. Is this simply the biggest rap beef in history playing out in court? Or does Drake have a legitimate case against an industry giant?
What do you think? Is this just rap culture or something more serious? Drop a comment and let’s talk about it.
