UMG claims Drake's lawsuit is an attempt to "save face" in a recent motion to dismiss the defamation suit

Universal Music Group (UMG) filed a motion dismissing Drake's defamation lawsuit because they claim he filed it to "save face" after losing to Kendrick Lamar in a rap battle. The court documents submitted on March 17 present evidence that Drake's accusations against UMG lack substance because he was dissatisfied with the famous rap rivalry results, as reported by Billboard on March 17, 2025.

In its court filing, Universal Music Group contends that Drake, "one of the most successful recording artists of all time," initiated the legal action after being "publicly embarrassed." The company asserts diss tracks stand as a rooted element of rap culture with Drake himself having broadcasted similar attacks toward Lamar.

"Instead of accepting the loss like the unbothered rap artist he often claims to be, he has sued his own record label in a misguided attempt to salve his wounds,"

Universal Music Group's attorneys wrote in the filing. The company further asserts that Drake has used Universal Music Group's platform to release his own diss tracks, making it hypocritical for him to claim defamation over Lamar's Not Like Us.

---

UMG argues Drake's lawsuit lacks merit, citing free speech protections

Drake's lawsuit from January states that Universal Music Group intentionally boosted the song Not Like Us while conducting a "malicious narrative" propaganda campaign against him regarding p*dophilia.

The legal complaint avoids mentioning Lamar directly but utilizes UMG for allegedly using enhanced promotional practices that resulted in reputation harm towards Drake, as reported by Billboard on March 17, 2025.

However, Universal Music Group's motion to dismiss states that Lamar’s lyrics fall under the protection of free speech and cannot be considered defamatory. The company argues that the statements made in Not Like Us are "rhetorical hyperbole" rather than factual assertions. Since defamation laws only apply to false statements of fact, UMG asserts that Drake's claims lack legal standing.

The 2022 petition signed by Drake serves as Universal Music Group's evidence to defend its stance against using rap lyrics as crime evidence. The petition supported by creative artists such as Megan Thee Stallion and 21 Savage stated lyrics should be treated as artistic expressions without requiring factual interpretation, as stated by Billboard.

"As Drake recognized, when it comes to rap, 'the final work is a product of the artist’s vision and imagination," Universal Music Group's attorneys stated. "Drake was right then and is wrong now. The court should grant UMG's motion and dismiss the complaint with prejudice."

In response to Universal Music Group's motion, Drake's attorney, Michael J. Gottlieb, criticized UMG's motion, stating that the company is attempting to shift focus away from its alleged misconduct.

He accused Universal Music Group of profiting from misinformation that has led to violence and described the motion as a desperate attempt to evade accountability. Gottlieb expressed confidence that the case would move forward and expose what he claimed to be UMG's long history of exploiting its artists.

The legal battle stems from a rap feud between Drake and Kendrick Lamar that escalated in May 2024. The two artists exchanged multiple diss tracks, with Lamar's Not Like Us ultimately gaining widespread attention. The song accused Drake of serious allegations and became a viral sensation, even being performed at the 2025 Super Bowl halftime show.

Drake's lawsuit alleges that Universal Music Group knowingly promoted the track to maximize its commercial success while spreading damaging falsehoods about him. However, Universal Music Group counters that such claims are baseless, emphasizing that the nature of diss tracks involves exaggerated insults and hyperbole.

Drake's legal team is expected to file a response to UMG's motion in the coming weeks. If the court denies Universal Music Group's motion to dismiss, the case will proceed to discovery, where further evidence and testimony could be introduced. A final ruling on the motion is anticipated within the next few months, according to Billboard.