The authorized staff of Drake tackled Common Music Group (UMG) forward of Kendrick Lamar’s efficiency on the 2025 Tremendous Bowl.
Because the authorized battle over Lamar’s diss monitor Not Like Us—which targets Drake—continues, Drake’s attorneys issued an announcement earlier than Lamar took the stage on Sunday, February 9, 2025, in New Orleans. They expressed frustration over UMG’s dealing with of the dispute involving each artists, who’re signed to the label.
The authorized staff argued that UMG’s actions surrounding the track’s launch and promotion have been unethical and that the monitor portrays Drake in a defamatory method. They accused the label of prioritizing monetary achieve over inventive integrity and moral accountability.
READ ALSO: Kendrick Lamar shares his true motive behind rap battle with Drake
“UMG is masquerading as a champion of inventive freedom by calling its actions merely ‘leisure,’ however there may be nothing entertaining about pedophilia or baby abuse in the true world,” the assertion learn. “We’re assured that the proof we are going to finally current at trial, together with data we’ve already realized and proceed to obtain since submitting the lawsuit, will expose UMG’s gross prioritization of its personal company income and government bonuses over its completely signed artists’ well-being and the reality.”
The assertion was first shared by New York Occasions music reporter Joe Coscarelli on X.
new assertion from Drake’s authorized staff forward of the Tremendous Bowl halftime present, the place Kendrick Lamar might attain ~100 million folks directly with “Not Like Us”
Drake has sued (his and Kendrick’s label) Common Music Group, calling their promotion of the track defamatory pic.twitter.com/eXEXpIbMsi
— Joe Coscarelli (@joecoscarelli) February 9, 2025
In response to the lawsuit earlier, UMG filed a 144-page movement on Thursday, January 23, 2025, citing the Texas Residents Participation Act (TCPA), a legislation designed to stop retaliatory lawsuits that try and silence people or entities on issues of public concern. UMG argued that Drake’s lawsuit, filed below Texas Rule of Civil Process 202, is an effort to intimidate and penalize the corporate for exercising its First Modification rights.
READ ALSO: Common Music hits again; recordsdata movement to dismiss Drake’s Texas petition over ‘Not Like Us’ claims
In accordance with UMG’s movement, Drake now carries the burden of proof below the TCPA and should present compelling proof to assist his claims. A key allegation in Drake’s lawsuit is that UMG engaged in a “pay-to-play scheme” by allegedly funneling funds to iHeartMedia—the nation’s largest radio community—to spice up Not Like Us.
Nevertheless, UMG asserts that Drake has failed to offer credible proof for his accusations. The movement claims his petition depends on unverified allegations and inadmissible rumour, significantly from unnamed sources.
In conclusion, UMG has requested the court docket to dismiss Drake’s lawsuit, droop all discovery till a ruling is made, and order Drake to cowl the corporate’s authorized charges and court docket prices.
READ ALSO: Drake sues Common Music Group over Kendrick Lamar diss monitor “Not Like Us”
