Rapper Drake has formally appealed the dismissal of his high‑profile defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group (UMG) tied to Kendrick Lamar’s Grammy‑winning diss track Not Like Us, filing a 117‑page appellate brief this week in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
The case stems from a bitter rap feud in 2024 in which Lamar’s single — widely streamed, commercially dominant and critically lauded — included controversial lyrics implying Drake engaged in inappropriate behavior. Drake’s original lawsuit, filed in January 2025, accused UMG of intentionally publishing and promoting the track while knowing its lyrics were “false and defamatory,” and alleged the label’s actions damaged his reputation and career.
In October 2025, U.S. District Judge Jeannette A. Vargas dismissed the suit, ruling that the song’s content — released amid a rap battle — constituted protected opinion rather than actionable defamation, and that reasonable listeners understand diss tracks as hyperbolic artistic expression.
Drake’s appeal challenges this key legal foundation, arguing the district court’s ruling created a “dangerous categorical rule” that would shield all rap diss tracks from defamation claims and set a precedent harmful to artists’ rights. His legal team asserts that certain listeners interpreted Lamar’s lyrics as factual rather than rhetorical, causing real‑world reputational harm globally. They argue UMG’s promotion and wide distribution of the record extended its reach well beyond the rap feud context, citing its placement at major cultural moments like the Super Bowl and awards shows.
UMG has previously defended the dismissal, calling Drake’s case unfounded and stressing the creative nature of hip‑hop. The label refutes any claim it acted with malice, asserting its role is to promote all its artists’ music fairly.
The appeal underscores a broader tension in music law: how artistic expression intersects with alleged defamation, especially in a genre built on provocative lyrics. A decision from the appellate court could have consequences beyond this case — potentially influencing how future disputes over diss tracks and reputational claims are handled in the legal system.
