Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Queen, post: 84973, member: 27"] Drake is not done fighting Not Like Us, pushing back on a judge’s ruling and daring an appeals court to rethink how rap lyrics get treated in defamation law. The case is back from the dead [LIST] [*]Three months after losing in court, Drake is officially appealing the dismissal of his defamation lawsuit. [*]The target remains Universal Music Group, not Kendrick Lamar directly. [/LIST] Where the appeal landed [LIST] [*]A 117-page appellate brief hit the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on January 21. [*]The filing asks the court to undo an October ruling from Judge Jeannette Vargas. [/LIST] What the original lawsuit claimed [LIST] [*]Drake sued in January 2025, months after Not Like Us dropped in May 2024. [*]The accusation was that UMG knowingly pushed lyrics he says were false and defamatory. [*]The song sat at the center of a highly publicized feud with Kendrick Lamar. [/LIST] Why the judge threw it out [LIST] [*]Judge Vargas framed the track as a protected opinion, not defamation. [*]She treated the song as part of a broader rap battle context, not a standalone statement of fact. [/LIST] Drake’s core argument on appeal [LIST] [*]His lawyers say the court went too far by implying that diss tracks can never be actionable. [*]The brief insists millions of listeners took the lyrics as factual, not metaphorical or insulting. [*]The claim is that real-world belief followed, not just online trash talk. [/LIST] The cultural reach problem [LIST] [*]Not Like Us exploded beyond rap circles, according to the filing. [*]It logged over 1.8 billion streams on Spotify alone. [*]The track won Record of the Year at the Grammy Awards. [*]It was also performed at the Super Bowl Halftime Show for an audience of 133.5 million. [/LIST] Why context is the fight [LIST] [*]Drake argues the judge wrongly bundled the song into the entire feud. [*]His filing says Not Like Us was the only track that truly broke through. [*]The brief contrasts it with Euphoria, which it says drew just 4.1 percent of the attention. [/LIST] The republishing angle [LIST] [*]Lawyers argue the song kept reaching fresh audiences with no clue about the rap beef. [*]Examples cited include political and award show settings. [*]The claim is that many listeners never heard any diss tracks before this one. [/LIST] Business practices back in play [LIST] [*]The appeal also revives claims of deceptive promotion. [*]Drake alleges UMG aggressively spread the track despite knowing the allegations were false. [*]Safety concerns for Drake and his family are folded into that argument. [/LIST] UMG’s last word, for now [LIST] [*]After the dismissal, UMG called the lawsuit an attack on creative expression. [*]The company previously labeled Drake’s claims as wild conspiracies. [*]As of this filing, UMG has not responded publicly to the appeal. [/LIST] [/QUOTE]

Name