Spotify dismisses Drake's claims about artificially boosting Kendrick Lamar's Not Like Us track

Spotify has officially denied allegations made by Drake that it artificially inflated streaming numbers for Kendrick Lamar's track Not Like Us. In a legal filing submitted on Friday, December 20, 2024, the streaming platform labeled the claims as "false" and described Drake's legal action as a "subversion of the normal judicial process," as reported by Billboard.

Drake's accusations, filed through his company Frozen Moments in November 2024, alleged that the streaming platform collaborated with Universal Music Group (UMG) to artificially boost streams for Lamar's diss track. He claimed the track's success was achieved through bots, payola, and other tactics. Additionally, Drake accused UMG of defamation, asserting that Not Like Us falsely labeled him a "s*x offender."

In its rebuttal, Spotify's legal team refuted all accusations, stating that no arrangement existed with UMG to promote the song. The streaming platform's motion, filed in a Manhattan court, stated:

"Spotify and UMG have never had any such arrangement."

The company's attorneys further criticized the legal strategy employed by Drake, calling his pre-action filing an "extraordinary" and "far-fetched" attempt to obtain evidence for claims that would not stand in a formal lawsuit.

---

Spotify calls Drake's legal action "false"

Spotify's opposition papers also addressed the claim that bots were used to inflate streams for Not Like Us by 30 million. The company's vice president of music, David Kaefer, provided a sworn affidavit stating that the streaming platform "invests heavily" in anti-fraud measures.

He noted that the platform removes manipulated streams, withholds royalties, and applies penalty fees in cases of confirmed artificial streaming.

"Confirmed and suspected artificial streams are also removed from our chart calculations. This helps us to protect royalty payouts for honest, hardworking artists," Spotify's opposition stated.

Spotify also addressed specific claims regarding its use of the "Marquee" tool. It clarified that only €500 was spent to promote the track Not Like Us in France using its "Marquee" tool, a visual ad explicitly disclosed to users as a "Sponsored Recommendation."

Drake's accusations against Spotify and UMG (Universal Music Group) came amid an ongoing feud with Kendrick Lamar, which escalated after the release of Not Like Us, a diss track from Lamar's surprise album GNX. Released last month, Not Like Us topped the Billboard Hot 100 and received multiple nominations for the 2025 Grammy Awards.

On the same day that Drake filed his New York petition, he submitted another legal action in Texas. This filing accused UMG of defamation, alleging the label knowingly distributed a track that made "false" claims about him. He further claimed that UMG engaged in a "pay-to-play scheme" by funneling payments to iHeartMedia, the largest radio network in the US, to promote Not Like Us.

UMG, which distributes both Drake's and Kendrick Lamar's music, issued a statement last month dismissing the former's claims as "offensive and untrue." According to a December 20, 2024, report by Variety, the company's statement read:

"No amount of contrived and absurd legal arguments in this pre-action submission can mask the fact that fans choose the music they want to hear."

While UMG has not yet filed a formal legal response to Drake's claims, the Swedish streaming platform's opposition echoes UMG's sentiments, emphasizing that civil RICO cases are difficult to prove without substantial evidence.

Spotify's lawyers also highlighted the unconventional nature of Drake's legal strategy. Rather than filing a full lawsuit, the rapper filed a "pre-action" petition, a move that the attorneys described as an attempt to bypass standard legal procedures. The company argued:

"What petitioner is seeking to do here ... is to bypass the normal pleading requirements ... and obtain by way of pre-action discovery that which it would only be entitled to seek were it to survive a motion to dismiss."

According to the streaming platform's legal team, Drake's claims lacked sufficient evidence to support allegations of racketeering, bot activity, and payola.

"The Petition asserts no specific facts of any kind in support of these alleged RICO and deceptive practices violations. Instead, it relies exclusively on speculation ... or the claims of anonymous individuals on the internet," the company stated.

---

The UMG's formal response to the defamation claims is still pending. While Drake's pre-action filings aim to collect evidence for a potential lawsuit, neither his legal team nor UMG has provided further comments on Spotify's latest filing.