New year, same beef. Drake upped the ante in the rap wars on Wednesday, filing a federal lawsuit against his label Universal Music Group (UMG) over their support of Kendrick Lamar's "Not Like Us" defamation and harassment. UMG also distributes Lamar's music through Interscope Records. Among the many claims in the lawsuit, Drake's attorneys allege that UMG "whitelisted" Lamar's diss song in order for popular content creators to amplify the song on their pages.
On January 14, just one day before filing the defamation and harassment complaint, Drake withdrew his previous pre-litigation documents against UMG and Spotify, accusing the two companies of colluding to illegally and artificially increase the listening ratings of "Not Like Us." The new lawsuit, filed Jan. 15 in the Southern District of New York, calls for a jury trial as it claims UMG "used every weapon in its arsenal" to make Kendrick's song a "viral hit." , despite its alleged intent to "convey specific, clear and false factual allegations that Drake is a criminal pedophile."
The 81-page complaint was filed by rolling stones Claims UMG took unprecedented steps to ensure the popularity of "Not Like Us", whose most famous lyrics include "Say Drake, I heard you like 'em young'", "Certified Lover Boy?" Certified Pedophile ” and pun “to try to resonate, it might be A minor. Key to the defamation claim is Drake's assertion that UMG knew the claims were untrue and pushed the song anyway through "relentless publicity." His reputation and safety, in turn, were repeatedly compromised, the suit alleges. damage.
A spokesman for the label countered in a statement that the company would never harm its own artists. "Throughout his career, Drake has knowingly and successfully used Universal Music Group to spread his music and verses to engage in traditionally outrageous back-and-forth 'rap battles' to express his disapproval of other artists," the statement said. "He now seeks to weaponize the legal process to suppress the artist's creative expression and seek damages from Universal Music Group for distributing the artist's music."
Drake claims that part of UMG's campaign included paying the NFR podcast to promote the song without disclosure. The lawsuit also claims that Universal Music Group harmed Drake by removing copyright restrictions on YouTube and Twitch, a process known as "whitelisting," making the song widely available to content creators. The lawsuit claims that UMG violated its own "formal injunction" against the whitelist by allowing content creators to play the song in its entirety in monetized videos. In contrast, creators typically don't get paid if they use copyrighted material in a clip.
The lawsuit alleges that the whitelisting "was intentionally done with the full knowledge of Universal Music Group for the purpose of disseminating the recording and its defamatory content as widely and expeditiously as possible." This despite the fact that throughout Kendrick Lamar and There are plenty of reaction videos online to Drake's rap battle (in which Drake also claims Lamar was violent toward his romantic partner Whitney Alford and that his business partner may be the father of one of his children Real Father) The lawsuit singles out five popular platforms as having benefited significantly from whitelisting.
Zias, a streamer embroiled in lawsuits whose musical reaction content has earned him nearly 5 million YouTube subscribers, invited me to join his January 15 livestream to comment on the news. His "Not Like Us" reaction video posted last spring has been viewed 6.6 million times. Zias first responded to the lawsuit on X with a three-second meme that featured some mysterious figure saying, "Huh?" Wait, what? "Hmm" "Wow" "What?" " in rapid succession. Although the complaint states that Drake did not believe UMG had whitelisted songs on any platform prior to "Not Like Us," Zias disputes this.
"At my request, Universal Music Group has whitelisted many of our videos," he said. Zias said he contacted representatives from UMG subsidiary Interscope to request that "Not Like Us" be whitelisted for his personal use, and that it was his understanding that the song was not originally whitelisted on YouTube. He also said other creators have reached out to his Interscope contacts. "They may at some point decide to let creators monetize their videos after seeing the response," Zias said. "I don't know. But I know from our side that that's not the case."
Although Zias isn't sure, he believes Drake's first diss on Kendrick in the series, "Push Up," was also whitelisted. UMG has not responded yet rolling stonesRequested comment on this matter.
Still, Zias and his co-host B. Lou said their "Not Like Us" reaction video became profitable in less than a week. While Zias declined to go into specifics, he said he knows exactly how much money he made from covering the entire beef, but not from "Not Like Us." "It's been productive," he said. "A lot." I think everyone can attest to that. Everyone ate in this situation. "
However, both Zias and B. Lou denied that monetization fueled their reactions to the song. Zias posted reaction videos to Drake's "Family Matters" and "The Heart Part 6," which are still available to watch. "It's not going to have an impact on our response because in the response community, we respond regardless of whether it's copyrighted or not," he said. "Nobody's going to say, 'Oh, they're letting us make money from this. Let's react in a certain way."
Zias, like many, finds Drake's legal claims illogical. He said he's been a fan of Drake throughout the fight. "As an artist, I still love Drake's music. As an artist, I still hate Kendrick. Even aside from the beef, it doesn't make me not want to listen to Drake," he said. B. Lou noted, though, that being called out in the lawsuit could turn some of their own viewers against them: "If some of his fans are swinging with us, (now) they say we have some kind of reaction to some bread—now They'd be like, 'Oh, well, we're not rocking with them anymore.'" B. Lou also felt a little dissonant with Drake. "I still rock with Drake," he said. "It makes me a little uncomfortable."
No Life Shaq, another creator named in the lawsuit whose "Not Like Us" reaction video has received 5.3 million views on YouTube, posted a 10-minute response in the filing. "This nigga Drake has tipped off the reaction community!" he exclaimed. "Nigga, we chilled out and had fun and you put us on a case? This has to be the sweetest nigga ever, dog." He called Drake a great artist, but "no Hip Hop," insisting that regardless of whether they can monetize the "not like us" response, he and his peers will still share their thoughts on "the biggest beef of all time." He also noted that the lawsuit only names creators with large followings. "If you're going to house some of us, you have to house all of us," he said. No life, no response from Shaq rolling stonesRequested for further comment.
The responses from other creators named in the lawsuit were quicker, but just as confusing. CartierFamily expressed similar skepticism towards X, writing: "Wow, we are mentioned in the Drake lawsuit?" with three laughing emojis. Last year, four YouTubers shared reviews of "Not Like Us," which has now been viewed 2 million times. However, CartierFamily’s recent content has largely consisted of Trump endorsements and conservative commentary. rolling stones A request for comment was sent to all creators who would benefit from the whitelist, as well as the NFR Podcast.
Experts, including two lawyers, said rolling stones They believe Drake's lawsuit against Universal Music Group and other companies will ultimately be moot after losing the battle last year. "I think it's in everyone's best interest that this situation not continue," said Brian "Z" Zioosk, co-founder of streaming service Audiomack. "There's no denying the fact that this happened will do a disservice to Drake's reputation." "More damage than he has experienced in the past 12 months."