Drake Calls Kendrick Lamar’s Super Bowl Halftime Show Defamatory In Updated UMG Lawsuit

Drake has filed an updated version of his defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group over Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us,” claiming the rival’s Super Bowl halftime show was intended to “assassinate the character of another artist.”

In an amended complaint filed late Wednesday, Drake’s attorneys say the Super Bowl show, watched by 133 million people and “million of children”, “revitalized the public’s attention” to lyrics calling Drake a “certified pedophile” – a diss that the Canadian superstar claims is false and defamatory.

“It was the first, and will hopefully be the last, Super Bowl halftime show orchestrated to assassinate the character of another artist,” writes Drake’s lawyer Michael Gottlieb.

During the halftime show, which took place weeks after Drake had already sued UMG over “Not Like Us,” Lamar omitted the word “pedophile.” But after much speculation over whether he’d play the song at all, Kendrick really didn’t hold back otherwise – making it the centerpiece of the set and clearly rapping similar lyrics, including: “Say, Drake, I hear you like ’em young.”

In Wednesday’s updated lawsuit, Drake’s lawyers say the decision to censor the word “pedophile” during the broadcast failed to avoid the song’s defamatory meaning – and instead had underscored the rapper’s legal case against UMG.

“Kendrick Lamar would not have been permitted to perform during the Super Bowl Performance unless the word ‘pedophile’… was omitted from the lyrics — that is because nearly everyone understands that it is defamatory to falsely brand someone a ‘certified pedophile’,” Gottlieb wrote in the new complaint. “The NFL, as well as the corporate entities responsible for the televised and streaming broadcasts of the Super Bowl Performance, all understood the words “certified pedophile” to be unacceptable in a broadcast to millions of listeners.”

Though it added new claims, the amended complaint also softened certain accusations against UMG, like the lawsuit’s claim that the label used bots to boost the song’s streaming numbers. Drake’s lawyers removed specific allegations about a “whistleblower” and potentially “indirectly” orchestrated such a campaign: “At minimum, UMG was aware that third parties were using bots to stream the Recording and turned a blind eye, despite having the power to stop such behavior.”

In a statement to Billboard on Thursday, UMG blasted Drake and his lawyers over the latest filing, calling the case “frivolous and reckless” and saying that changes were made to the lawsuit because Drake’s team was “fearful of being sanctioned for asserting false allegations.”

“Drake, unquestionably one of the world’s most accomplished artists and with whom we’ve enjoyed at 16-year successful relationship, is being misled by his legal representatives into taking one absurd legal step after another,” UMG wrote. “Should his legal representatives senselessly keep the New York lawsuit alive, we will demonstrate that all remaining claims are without merit. It is shameful that these foolish and frivolous legal theatrics continue. They are reputationally and financially costly to Drake and have no chance of success.”

Lamar released “Not Like Us” last May amid a high-profile beef with Drake that saw the two UMG stars release a series of bruising diss tracks. The song, a knockout punch that blasted Drake as a “certified pedophile” over an infectious beat, eventually became a chart-topping hit in its own right.

In January, Drake took the unusual step of suing UMG over the song, claiming his own label had defamed him by boosting the track’s popularity. The lawsuit, which doesn’t name Lamar himself as a defendant, alleges that UMG “waged a campaign” against its own artist to spread a “malicious narrative” about pedophilia that it knew to be false.

UMG has already filed a scathing motion seeking to dismiss the case last month, arguing not only that it was “meritless” but also ridiculing Drake for suing in the first place. That motion will be refiled following the filing of Wednesday’s updated lawsuit.

In one of the case’s earliest skirmishes, Judge Jeannette A. Vargas ruled earlier this month that discovery could move ahead in the case, denying UMG’s request to halt document production and depositions until after she decides whether to dismiss the case entirely. Drake’s attorneys had already sought swathes of evidence, including Lamar’s recording contract.

Drake’s lawyers billed that decision as a major win at the time, allowing them to “see what UMG was so desperately trying to hide.” But on Thursday, UMG warned that the ruling would cut both ways: “That ‘win’ will become a loss if this frivolous and reckless lawsuit is not dropped in its entirety because Drake will personally be subject to discovery as well,” the company wrote. “As the old saying goes, ‘be careful what you wish for.’”

In their own statement Thursday, Drake’s legal team said the amended complaint “makes an already strong case stronger” than it was before: “UMG’s PR ‘spin’ and failed efforts to avoid discovery cannot suppress the facts and the truth,” Gottlieb said. “With discovery now moving forward, Drake will expose the evidence of UMG’s misconduct, and UMG will be held accountable for the consequences of its ill-conceived decisions.”

This article was originally published by Billboard Pro.