Drake has launched a legal battle against Universal Music Group (UMG) and Spotify, alleging that the two companies orchestrated a scheme to artificially boost the popularity of Kendrick Lamar’s song “Not Like Us.”
The song, which takes direct aim at Drake amid their ongoing feud, became a focal point of controversy when Drake’s legal team accused UMG of using underhanded tactics to manipulate streaming services and radio airwaves.
In a filing submitted Monday, November 25, in Manhattan federal court, Drake’s company, Frozen Moments LLC, detailed claims of illegal practices including the use of bots, payola, and other deceptive methods aimed at inflating the popularity of Lamar’s track.
According to Drake’s legal team, UMG did not rely on organic success or standard business practices but instead launched a calculated effort to manipulate the streaming landscape and influence public perception of the song.
Drake’s Legal Team Accuses UMG of Violating RICO Act
In their petition, Drake’s attorneys argued that UMG’s actions were not only unethical but illegal. The filing accuses UMG of violating the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, a federal law typically used in criminal cases targeting organized crime.
They also brought forward allegations of deceptive business practices and false advertising, citing New York state law.
“UMG did not rely on chance, or even ordinary business practices,” said Drake’s legal representatives in the filing. “Instead, it launched a campaign to manipulate and saturate the streaming services and airwaves with ‘Not Like Us.’”
This filing marks a significant development in the long-running feud between the two rap superstars, which had already seen a series of scathing diss tracks exchanged earlier this year.
The move to take legal action in business court over the matter represents an unprecedented escalation of the rivalry, as such disputes are typically settled in the realm of public feuds and music industry politics, not in litigation.
A Rift Between Drake and UMG
The case also reveals a deepening rift between Drake and Universal Music Group, a label with which he has been associated for the entirety of his career. Drake initially signed with Lil Wayne’s Young Money imprint, which was distributed by UMG’s Republic Records, before later securing a direct deal with Republic.
Lamar, on the other hand, has had a similar relationship with UMG, first through his partnership with the TDE label (distributed by Interscope), and more recently through his own pgLang company, licensed via Interscope.
Although Monday’s filing is not a full lawsuit but rather a “pre-action” petition — a procedural step under New York law designed to gather information before officially filing — the allegations made by Drake’s legal team are serious and could lead to a larger legal showdown.
Alleged Schemes to Inflate “Not Like Us” Popularity
The core of Drake’s complaint centers around the alleged methods UMG used to artificially inflate the popularity of Lamar’s song. Drake’s attorneys claim UMG employed several tactics to boost the song’s streaming numbers, including offering Spotify drastically reduced licensing rates in exchange for the platform recommending “Not Like Us” to users searching for unrelated songs and artists. The filing also accuses UMG of paying influencers to promote the song on social media and using bots to fraudulently boost the song’s numbers across digital platforms.
“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,” Drake’s legal team wrote.
Motives Behind UMG’s Alleged Scheme
Drake’s legal team contends that UMG’s aggressive push for Lamar’s song was driven by corporate incentives, specifically within the Interscope division of UMG. The filing suggests that executives at Interscope were motivated to maximize profits by promoting “Not Like Us,” viewing its success as a way to revitalize Lamar’s catalog and increase financial returns for the label.
“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,” the legal petition claims.
Drake’s Efforts to Resolve the Situation
The court documents also reveal that Drake attempted to engage with UMG directly before pursuing legal action. However, Drake’s attorneys argue that UMG showed no interest in resolving the matter amicably. They claim that UMG attempted to conceal its alleged wrongdoing, including by firing employees who were seen as 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,” the filing states. “UMG refused to engage in negotiations and insisted that it was not responsible for its own actions.”
Drake’s legal team further claims that UMG attempted to deflect responsibility for the scheme by pointing to Lamar, suggesting that Drake sue Kendrick directly instead of the label. They allege that UMG even threatened to take legal action against Lamar if Drake followed through on his plan to file a lawsuit.
As the case unfolds, the world watches closely to see if this dispute will lead to a significant legal battle, or if it will be resolved behind closed doors
