A federal choose has dismissed Drake’s defamation lawsuit towards Universal music Group (UMG). This closes—at the very least for now—one of many yr’s most intently watched artist-versus-label disputes. The ruling follows the fallout from Kendrick Lamar’s viral diss observe “Not Like Us,” which sparked a summer-long debate over artistry and competitors. It additionally raised questions concerning the line between efficiency and private assault.

Judge Jeannette A. Vargas dominated that the disputed lyrics—one in every of which focused Drake—have been protected below the First Amendment as “rhetorical hyperbole.” They weren’t thought-about statements of truth. In her opinion, she wrote that inside hip-hop’s lengthy custom of lyrical sparring, no “reasonable listener” would take such phrases actually. The courtroom additionally discovered that UMG, because the observe’s distributor, couldn’t be held answerable for content material that qualifies as creative expression.

Rap’s freedom versus authorized limits

Drake’s authorized workforce argued that UMG knowingly profited from materials they believed to be defamatory. They contended that UMG ought to have acted to restrict the track’s attain. UMG countered that diss tracks are naturally exaggerated and performative. They kind a core a part of rap’s inventive tradition.

Following the choice, a spokesperson for Drake mentioned the rapper plans to problem the ruling. “We intend to appeal today’s ruling, and we look forward to the Court of Appeals reviewing it,” the spokesperson shared with HOT97.

The dismissal underscores ongoing stress between free expression and defamation in fashionable music. As rap lyrics proceed to blur the road between character and confession, Drake’s enchantment might set an essential precedent. The case might form how courts interpret creative expression born from rivalry, bravado, and cultural commentary in hip-hop.