A new filing from Drake’s legal team claims Universal Music Group (UMG) may have orchestrated a “pay-to-play scheme” with iHeartRadio to boost Kendrick Lamar’s track, “Not Like Us,” while knowingly allowing defamatory content targeting the Canadian superstar.
In the latest twist to a heated industry battle, Drake has filed a second legal action against UMG, this time in Texas, following an earlier petition in New York. The filing alleges that UMG funneled payments to iHeartRadio to promote Lamar’s track on radio stations and accuses the music conglomerate of deliberately fueling the song’s success despite its “false and damaging accusations.”
According to the filing, Drake’s team asserts that the song labels him with untrue and highly inflammatory accusations, and claims UMG intentionally amplified the track’s reach to generate revenue while exploiting the controversy.
“UMG could have intervened to prevent the release or required the content to be altered, but they chose to double down,” Drake’s legal team wrote. “Their strategy to turn ‘Not Like Us’ into a cultural spectacle came at the expense of Drake’s reputation, ultimately driving massive profits for the label.”
The Texas petition, like the New York filing, is not a formal lawsuit but a pre-action request seeking depositions from UMG and iHeartRadio. Drake’s lawyers say they need more information to determine whether to pursue claims of defamation, civil fraud, and racketeering.
A Growing Rift Between Drake and UMG
This filing marks a significant escalation in the rift between Drake and the label that has supported his career from the start. Having initially signed with Young Money, a UMG affiliate, Drake later transitioned to Republic Records under the UMG umbrella. The allegations suggest a deeper fracture in the long-standing relationship, raising questions about the company’s loyalty to its artists.
While Lamar is not named as a respondent in the filing and faces no legal accusations, the track and its promotional campaign are at the center of Drake’s grievances. According to the filing, UMG approved the song’s release despite its accompanying album art and music video also making defamatory implications against Drake.
UMG’s Response
UMG has categorically denied the accusations, calling them “offensive and untrue.” In a statement, the company emphasized its commitment to ethical practices in music promotion, stating, “Our focus is always on supporting our artists and respecting their creative integrity. These baseless claims distract from the true power of music to connect and inspire.”
A Clash Beyond Music
The legal action highlights how personal conflicts in the music industry can spill into the courtroom. What began as a lyrical feud between two of the most influential voices in hip-hop has now evolved into a high-stakes legal and reputational battle.
Drake’s claims not only challenge UMG’s handling of internal competition between its artists but also raise broader questions about ethical practices in the music industry. As the case unfolds, it may set new precedents for how labels manage and promote potentially controversial content involving their artists.
For now, all eyes are on the courts as Drake and UMG prepare for what could be a game-changing legal showdown.
