Drake threatens to sue Universal Music and Spotify for 'artificially inflating' Kendrick Lamar's 'Not Like Us'

Drake has filed a lawsuit against Universal Music Group (UMG) and Spotify, alleging that the two businesses collaborated to artificially inflate the popularity of Kendrick Lamar's "Not Like Us."

Drake watches on as the Sacramento Kings play the Toronto Raptors during the second half of their basketball game at the Scotiabank Arena on November 2, 2024.

Mark Blinch/Getty Images

In a petition Monday, November 25, in Manhattan court, Drake's Frozen Moments LLC accused UMG of starting an unlawful "scheme" including bots, payola, and other ways to boost Lamar's song - a single that severely attacked Drake amid the two singers' continuing spat.

"UMG did not rely on chance, or even ordinary business practices," Drake's attorneys claim. "It instead launched a campaign to manipulate and saturate the streaming services and airwaves."

Drake's lawyers accuse UMG of breaking the federal "RICO" act, which is frequently utilized in criminal prosecutions involving organized crime. They also allege misleading business practices and false advertising under New York state law.

The court filings reflect a significant shift in the two musicians' high-profile spat, which saw Drake and Lamar trade blistering diss recordings over many months earlier this year. In the hip-hop scene, the idea of such a conflict escalating into corporate litigation seemed unimaginable.

It also marks a dramatic schism between Drake and UMG, where the singer has spent his entire career — first through a deal with Lil Wayne's Young Money label, which was released by Republic Records, and then straight to Republic.

Lamar, however, has spent his whole career with UMG, initially through the TDE label, which was released by Interscope, and most recently through his own business, pgLang, which he licenses through Interscope.

In technical words, Monday's filing is not yet a full lawsuit, but rather a "pre-action" petition — a mechanism under New York law designed to get facts before launching a case. Parties identified in such petitions are not often targeted in the resulting lawsuit, and the charges in Monday's filing appear to be more directly focused at UMG than Spotify.

A UMG spokesperson strongly refuted Drake's charges in a statement to Billboard, saying, "The suggestion that UMG would do anything to undermine any of its artists is offensive and untrue." Our marketing and promotional initiatives follow the highest ethical standards. "No amount of contrived and absurd legal arguments in this pre-action submission can conceal the fact that fans choose the music they want to hear."

Drake's attorneys argue that UMG carried out its "scheme" in a number of ways, including billing Spotify significantly lower license charges in exchange for the streamer promoting the song to customers searching for "unrelated songs and artists." They further say that UMG paid influencers to promote the song on social media and recruited legions of bots to artificially inflate the statistics.

"UMG … conspired with and paid currently unknown parties to use 'bots' to artificially inflate the spread of 'Not Like Us' and deceive consumers into believing the song was more popular than it was in reality," according to Drake's attorneys.

One particular eye-catching assertion in the suit is that UMG paid Apple to have its speech assistant Siri "purposefully misdirect users" to Kendrick's song.

"Online sources reported that when users asked Siri to play the album 'Certified Lover Boy' by [Drake], Siri instead played 'Not Like Us,' which contains the lyric 'certified pedophile,' an allegation against Drake," according to the rapper's attorneys.

Apple is not mentioned as a respondent in the petition or accused of any legal misconduct.

Why did UMG opt to aggressively promote Lamar's song? Drake's attorneys claim it was partly due to internal organizational dynamics at UMG and Interscope, where pay incentives for executives are "largely based on the specific UMG division, rather than the performance of UMG more generally."

"UMG's schemes … were motivated, at least in part, by the desire of executives at Interscope to maximize their own profits," wrote Drake's legal counsel. "Executives at Interscope have been incentivized to maximize the financial success of Interscope through the promotion of 'Not Like Us' and its revitalizing impact on the artist's prior recording catalog."

Drake's lawyers say he discussed the problem with UMG before going to court, but the music label had "no interest in taking responsibility for its misconduct." To the contrary, he believes UMG aggressively sought to conceal its misdeeds, including removing employees "perceived to be loyal to Drake."

"Drake has repeatedly sought to engage UMG in discussions to resolve the ongoing harm he has suffered as a result of UMG's actions," according to the petition. "UMG refused to engage in negotiations, and insisted that UMG is not responsible for its own actions."

Drake, instead, claims that UMG has "pointed the finger" at Lamar and has demanded that Drake sue his competitor rather than the label. He further alleges that UMG informed him that if Drake filed his own case, the company would sue Lamar. Hollywood Above