Drake‘s defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group (UMG) over Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us” lyrics has prompted legal and cultural scholars to warn a federal judge that treating rap lyrics as literal statements could fuel racial prejudice in the justice system.
In a court filing exclusively obtained by AllHipHop, four academics—Charis Kubrin, Jack Lerner, Adam Dunbar and Kyle Winnen—submitted an amicus brief on May 14 in support of UMG’s motion to dismiss the case.
The brief argues that Hip-Hop diss tracks are a long-established form of exaggerated artistic expression and should not be interpreted as factual claims.
“Drake’s defamation claim rests on the assumption that every word of ‘Not Like Us’ should be taken literally, as a factual representation,” the scholars wrote. “This assumption is not just faulty—it is dangerous.”
The brief, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, aims to educate the court on the creative norms of rap battles, where artists often use hyperbole, sarcasm and lyrical bravado to assert dominance, not to make factual accusations.
“They are hyperbolic forms of creative expression consistent with the unique artistic practices and normative conventions of the genre,” the scholars explained. “Rap diss tracks are understood by audiences not to represent factual assertions about the opposing artist, but rather to demonstrate skill and dominance meant to build allegiance and win competitions through clever wordplay, hyperbole, bluster, and demonstrations of disrespect.”
The experts also warned that taking rap lyrics at face value in courtrooms could invite racial stereotypes and undermine free speech protections.
“When rap lyrics are admitted, it is because they are treated as literal. This in turn opens the door to racial bias and stereotypes into the courtroom, as empirical studies have demonstrated,” they wrote. “Treating rap lyrics as literal also threatens First Amendment speech protections, and the practice already has created a demonstrable chilling effect across the industry.”
Drake first filed the lawsuit in January, claiming that “Not Like Us” and its promotion falsely labeled him a “certified pedophile.”
In April, he expanded the complaint to include Kendrick Lamar‘s Super Bowl LIX halftime show and his Grammy Awards appearance, arguing those events amplified the alleged defamation to a broader audience.
UMG responded on May 7 with a motion to dismiss, calling the lyrics “nonactionable opinion and rhetorical hyperbole.”
The label’s lawyers described the updated complaint as “astonishing” and said it was an effort by Drake to “save face” after losing a public lyrical battle.
UMG also pointed out that Drake’s revised filing removed earlier claims that the label had paid for bots to boost streams of “Not Like Us,” calling those allegations “obviously false.”
“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,” UMG’s legal team wrote.
Despite the motion to dismiss, the legal process is still moving forward.
A judge recently denied UMG’s request to pause discovery, allowing Drake’s team to continue seeking documents, including Lamar’s contracts with the label.
Related
