Drake’s Label Files to Dismiss Amended Lawsuit Over Kendrick Lamar’s ‘Not Like Us’: His ‘New Allegations Are Astonishing’

As expected, Drake’s label Universal Music Group has entered a motion to dismiss the rapper’s amended lawsuit for defamation that he filed in April.

Drake filed his initial suit against UMG in January over Kendrick Lamar‘s “Not Like Us,” claiming that the label intentionally engaged in defamation by promoting the song. In March, UMG filed a motion to dismiss. Last month, Drake’s legal counsel refiled an amended complaint to focus on events that took place since the initial filing, claiming that UMG knowingly negotiated and promoted “Not Like Us” via Lamar’s Super Bowl performance and consented to the track being played at the 2025 Grammy Awards.

On Wednesday, UMG once again filed to dismiss, this time for the amended complaint, largely maintaining the arguments from the original motion while addressing the more recent claims made in the updated complaint. Counsel for the company began by stating that Drake filed an amended complaint where he “removed obviously false factual allegations,” and said that the “new allegations are astonishing.”

Regarding the Super Bowl performance, lawyers for UMG wrote, “As Drake concedes, Lamar’s Super Bowl performance did not include the lyric that Drake or his associates are ‘certified pedophiles’ (i.e., the alleged ‘Defamatory Material’ that is at the heart of this case). The focus of Drake’s new claims—that ‘the largest audience for a Super Bowl halftime show ever’ did not hear Lamar call Drake or his crew pedophiles—betrays this case for what it is: Drake’s attack on the commercial and creative success of the rap artist who defeated him, rather than the content of Lamar’s lyrics.”

In a statement to Variety, a UMG spokesperson shared, “Nowhere in the hundred-plus page ‘legal’ blather written by Drake’s lawyers do they bother to acknowledge that Drake himself has written and performed massively successful songs containing equally provocative taunts against other artists. Nor do they mention that it was Drake who started this particular exchange. Apparently, Drake’s lawyers believe that when Drake willingly participates in a performative rap-battle of music and poetry, he can be ‘defamed’ even though he engages in the exact same form of creative expression.”

Representatives for Drake did not respond to Variety‘s request for comment.

Throughout the 33-page document, reviewed by Variety, UMG expands on a few arguments made in their initial motion to dismiss. The company’s counsel claims that for Drake to justify his defamation claim, he “cherry-picked” anonymous online comments as evidence that listeners took “Not Like Us” as fact instead of art or hyperbole. They argue that the “subjective opinions of a handful of people do not factor in, particularly where — as here — they are found in anonymous online comments, which are notoriously unreliable.”

Beyond that, UMG’s counsel notes that Drake had withdrawn his prior “false allegations” that UMG paid to use bots to stream “Not Like Us,” as stated on a podcast. They’re claiming that Drake is now citing a different podcast host who said that Lamar used bots, and that he’s relying on a since-deleted anonymous X comment accusing Lamar of “buying promo” to “clown [Drake’s law]suit” and another post claiming UMG and Lamar used a bot streamer. “Courts reject such online comment-based pleading because online comments ‘utterly fail to make plausible’ the underlying factual claims,” they wrote.

In their statement to Variety, UMG continued, “Drake’s lawyers can also keep seeking to ‘uncover’ evidence of wild conspiracies as to why one song that upset Drake had massive global appeal, but there is nothing to ‘uncover.’ Except for this: by working tirelessly in partnership with our artists, we achieve global success for them and their music. Our continuing partnership with Drake and his enduring success is a shining example. Despite his lawyers’ attempts to silence other artists and threaten the companies that work with them, we remain committed to propelling Drake’s career while maintaining our unwavering support of all our artists’ creative expression. Drake’s included.”

Despite UMG’s motion to dismiss the amended complaint, discovery in the suit is still ongoing. In early April, a judge denied UMG’s request to stay the discovery process and allowed Drake to proceed in requesting access to documents, including Lamar’s contracts with the label.