TORONTO — Four U.S. academics say a "dangerous" precedent could be set for rap music if Drake wins his defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group.
New documents filed in a New York court ask the presiding judge to dismiss the "God's Plan" rapper's case against his own label over its role in Kendrick Lamar's hit "Not Like Us."
The submission was made on Wednesday by a group of criminology and law professors, who are not involved with either side of the dispute. They say they wanted to provide the court with the historical context of rap music and the fictional narratives that it can promote.
The academics urge the court to familiarize itself with the art form's history as artistic expression, its genre-specific practices and especially the conventions of battle raps, rap feuds and diss tracks.
They say a thorough understanding "is necessary not only to assess the defamation claim at issue in this case, but to prevent the harms that arise when courts treat rap lyrics as confessions or factual representations."
At issue are the lyrics of Lamar's "Not Like Us," in particular a line in which Drake says he's falsely branded as a pedophile.
Drake's lawsuit alleges that Universal's actions in publishing and promoting the song jeopardized his safety and damaged his reputation.
None of the allegations have been proven in court.
Drake's lawyers did not respond to a request for comment.
The group of academics does not directly reference Lamar's use of "certified pedophiles" in their court documents, but they warn that if Drake succeeds in his suit, it could threaten U.S. free speech protections.
They say diss tracks are "hyperbolic forms of creative expression," and that Drake's defamation claim "rests on the assumption that every word of 'Not Like Us' should be taken literally, as a factual representation."
"This assumption is not just faulty — it is dangerous," their proposed brief said.
"When rap lyrics are admitted (in court as evidence), 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.”
The document outlines numerous examples of performers who built their careers in rap battles since the 1990s, including Jay-Z and Eminem.
"Many of the conflicts or ‘beefs’ between rival rappers are created as publicity stunts to raise flagging careers and sales, or create interest in new releases," they wrote.
"Diss tracks by famous artists draw the attention of hundreds of millions of people, even those who are not hip-hop fans."
The document was signed by University of California academics Charis Kubrin, a law and criminology professor; Jack Lerner, a clinical professor of law; Kyle Winnen, a doctoral student of criminology; as well as Adam Dunbar, an assistant professor in the criminal justice department of the University of Nevada-Reno.
They say the documents were prepared independently of either party, and that Universal's counsel indicated it would not oppose the motion, while Drake's legal team did not respond.
The use of rap lyrics as evidence in criminal cases has long been disputed by free speech advocates who say the music is a form of creative expression protected by the First Amendment.
Drake's original lawsuit alleges that Universal's role in releasing "Not Like Us," which it says also called for “violent retribution” against him, led to incidents at his Toronto home, including intruders shooting a security guard and two attempted break-ins.
He also alleges the song damaged his reputation and his brand's value before his contract renegotiation with the company this year.
It further alleges UMG — the parent record label for Drake and Lamar — chose profits over the safety of its artists. Lamar is not named in the suit.
Universal Music Group is one of the largest labels in the world, with many smaller labels under its umbrella. Drake is signed to its Republic Records division, while Lamar is part of Interscope Records.
— with files from The Associated Press.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 15, 2025.
David Friend, The Canadian Press
