Drake Cites Kendrick Lamar’s Super Bowl Performance In Amended Complaint

by

As a gamer, I’d put it like this: “I, Drake, have stepped up my defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group. They say Kendrick Lamar’s Super Bowl Halftime performance in February portrayed me in a negative light, essentially tarnishing my reputation – that’s what they allege. And to make matters worse, the Grammy wins for ‘Not Like Us’ seem to have introduced new listeners to this recording, leading even more people to mistakenly believe I’m involved in some unsavory activities, like being a pedophile.

In the revised lawsuit submitted on Wednesday evening and examined by The Hollywood Reporter, Drake contended that his Super Bowl performance and Lamar’s omission of the term “pedophile” during “Not Like Us” supported his assertion that the song’s words were libelous. (Although Lamar didn’t explicitly use the word pedophile, he did perform lyrics that were suggestive in a similar manner, such as the line “I hear you like ’em young.”)

Drake’s suit stated that no further alterations were made. It’s believed, based on general knowledge, that Kendrick Lamar wouldn’t have been allowed to perform during the Super Bowl if the phrase “certified pedophiles” (specifically the word “pedophile”) hadn’t been removed from his lyrics. This is because most people understand that it’s libelous to incorrectly label someone as a ‘certified pedophile.’

The criticism highlighted statistics suggesting the halftime show was viewed by over 133 million people across various platforms, asserting that the performance exposed “Not Like Us” to millions of listeners who hadn’t previously heard the song or any of the songs leading up to it.

The initial complaint stated that this Super Bowl half-time performance was intended as a character attack on another artist, and it expressed hope that this would be a one-time event.

Three months after initially filing a lawsuit against UMG in January, Drake has now amended his complaint. The rapper alleges that UMG intentionally worked to make him an outcast or a target for harassment by spreading false claims about him. This alleged action was not because they believed the claims to be true, but rather, they aimed to profit from damaging Drake’s reputation.

UMG rejected the accusations, seeking to throw out the charges. On Wednesday evening, the organization released a detailed statement, labeling the lawsuit as “groundless” and expressing concern that the case could restrict artistic freedom of expression.

UMG stated that Drake, an undeniably renowned artist who we’ve had a flourishing 16-year partnership with, is unfortunately being guided by his lawyers into making one unreasonable legal move after another, which seems inappropriate.

As a gamer, I’d put it like this: “Two weeks ago, I got the green light from UMG to request documents like Kendrick Lamar’s contract. They made it clear that I’m not exempt from being asked for my own records too. They warned me to think twice before making such requests, hinting that I should be mindful of what I might uncover.

UMG stated that both the Texas and New York court cases are disrespectful towards artists and creative expression. If Drake’s representatives choose to prolong the New York lawsuit, we will prove that all remaining claims are baseless. It is regrettable that these unnecessary and frivolous legal actions persist. They are damaging to Drake’s reputation and have no prospect of success.

Read More

2025-04-17 09:24