Drake has reportedly initiated legal action against Universal Music, accusing the record label of artificially inflating streams for Kendrick Lamar’s track Not Like Us. The track, widely speculated to be a diss towards Drake, has reportedly gained significant streaming numbers, a rise which Drake alleges was influenced by artificial boosting mechanisms.
Drake’s legal complaint suggests that Universal Music, which manages both artists, may have engaged in practices that inflated the number of streams for the song. According to the lawsuit, Drake claims that this action was taken to maximize revenue and promote Lamar’s track, potentially at the expense of his music and reputation.
Not Like Us, which appeared on Kendrick Lamar’s latest album, is believed to include subtle jabs directed at Drake, which has led to speculation about a brewing rivalry between the two hip-hop stars. This legal move highlights the tensions that sometimes exist behind the scenes in the music industry, where business practices, such as artificial streaming manipulation, can impact the success and credibility of an artist’s work.
The case has sparked broader conversations about the ethics of streaming practices in the music industry, particularly as it relates to how streaming numbers can be influenced or manipulated by labels. Drake’s lawsuit against Universal Music underscores his frustration not just with the competition but with the practices that could influence the public perception of his work. Drake’s company, Frozen Moments LLC, has filed legal papers in New York accusing Universal Music and Spotify of being involved in an illegal “scheme” to artificially boost streams for Kendrick Lamar’s song Not Like Us. The lawsuit claims that Universal and Spotify used various illicit methods, including bots and payola, to promote the song and saturate the streaming services with inflated numbers.
Drake’s legal team argues that Universal Music, rather than letting the song’s success happen organically, deliberately launched a campaign to manipulate streaming platforms and media airwaves to increase Lamar’s track’s visibility and performance. The suit alleges that these tactics were not only deceptive but also unlawful, intended to artificially enhance the track’s popularity and revenue.
The legal action highlights Drake’s frustration with what he perceives as unfair tactics to elevate Lamar’s work, and it underscores broader concerns about the transparency and fairness of streaming practices in the music industry. The accusations of bots, payola, and manipulation suggest a level of underhandedness that could have serious implications for how streaming services and record labels operate.
This lawsuit has sparked significant attention, as it touches on the ethics of music promotion and the integrity of streaming metrics, raising questions about the power of major labels in influencing chart rankings and artist success. A spokesperson for Universal Music has strongly denied the allegations made by Drake, calling them “offensive and untrue.” The spokesperson emphasized that “fans choose the music they want to hear,” implying that the rise in streams for Kendrick Lamar’s track Not Like Us was a natural result of fan demand, not manipulation or interference from the label.
Spotify and Kendrick Lamar have yet to publicly respond to the claims.
Drake’s legal action, filed by his company Frozen Moments LLC, is not yet a formal lawsuit but rather a “pre-action petition.” This petition allows Drake’s legal team to request the court to order both Universal Music and Spotify to preserve all relevant documents and data that might be crucial for potential future litigation. This step is a precautionary measure, ensuring that any evidence that could support Drake’s claims is retained before proceeding with full legal action.
The BBC has reported that the primary focus of the legal action is directed at Universal Music, with Spotify being named in the petition as it might possess information that could be relevant to the case. This suggests that Drake’s team believes Spotify may have insights or data related to the alleged artificial manipulation of streams that could be valuable in strengthening their case.
Drake’s court filing points to the runaway success of Not Like Us as a key element in his accusations. The song, which has been widely seen as a significant blow in the ongoing rap beef between Drake and Kendrick Lamar, achieved remarkable success: 96 million streams in just seven days, a number one position on the US charts, and a spot in the top 10 of radio hits.
However, Drake’s legal team suggests that these impressive numbers were artificially inflated. The court documents allege that Universal Music and Spotify were involved in a coordinated campaign to manipulate the song’s streaming data, which allowed it to rise to such heights. This claim is central to Drake’s accusation that the streaming success of Not Like Us was not a result of organic fan support but rather the outcome of illegal tactics, including the use of bots, payola, and other manipulation strategies.
By highlighting these accomplishments and questioning their legitimacy, Drake’s legal team is aiming to challenge the fairness of the music industry’s practices and the transparency of streaming metrics. This legal action underscores the growing concerns over how streaming services and labels influence chart rankings and artist success, especially when high-stakes rivalries, such as the one between Drake and Lamar, are at play.
Drake’s lawyers have gone further in their accusations, alleging that Universal Music engaged in a coordinated scheme to artificially inflate the prominence of Not Like Us. They claim that Universal “conspired with and paid currently unknown parties” to boost the song’s success through questionable means.
One of the key points in the filing is the accusation that Universal Music cut its royalty rates for Not Like Us by 30%, in exchange for Spotify recommending the track to users, which would drive more streams and increase its chart rankings. This arrangement, according to Drake’s legal team, was part of an orchestrated effort to manipulate streaming data.
The filing also references a whistleblower who supposedly revealed details on a podcast, claiming to have been paid $2,500 to set up software “bots” that would stream Not Like Us on repeat. The bots allegedly helped turn the song into a “crazy hit,” inflating its numbers and driving its success artificially.
In addition to Spotify, Drake’s lawyers claim that the artificial promotion extended to other streaming services. They cite online reports that suggest when fans asked Apple’s voice assistant to play Drake’s album Certified Loverboy, they were instead directed to Not Like Us, further amplifying the track’s visibility and plays.
These accusations highlight the depth of the legal battle Drake is preparing, with his legal team seeking to prove that Universal Music manipulated the streaming process to unfairly elevate Lamar’s song. The case is significant not only because of the rivalry between Drake and Kendrick Lamar but also because it raises broader concerns about the transparency and ethics of the music streaming industry.
Drake’s legal filing adds a new layer to his ongoing feud with Kendrick Lamar, as it also marks a significant rift between Drake and Universal Music, the label that has represented him throughout his career. According to the court documents, Drake’s legal team asserts that the artist attempted to address the allegations privately with Universal but was met with resistance. They claim that the label showed “no interest in taking responsibility for its misconduct” and instead, tried to cover up its actions.
The filing goes further to accuse Universal Music of taking steps to conceal its alleged manipulation of the streaming numbers for Not Like Us. One of the more startling claims in the legal papers is that Universal fired staff members who were perceived as being loyal to Drake. This move, according to Drake’s legal team, appears to be part of an effort to distance itself from any responsibility for the alleged scheme.
Drake’s lawyers also argue that the manipulation of streaming data is a zero-sum game, meaning that when one song rises to the top, it is often at the expense of another artist. They claim that Not Like Us’s artificial success resulted in “economic harm” for Drake, as the inflated streams and chart positions deprived him of opportunities and revenue that would have been rightfully his.
This development represents a significant shift in the relationship between Drake and his label, as well as a new chapter in the ongoing battle between him and Kendrick Lamar. The legal action signals that Drake is not only challenging Lamar’s success but also taking on Universal Music for its alleged role in manipulating the system, a move that could have major repercussions in the music industry.
A spokesperson for Universal Music Group (UMG) has strongly rejected the allegations made in Drake’s legal filing. In a statement, they called the accusations “offensive and untrue,” emphasizing that the label would never engage in actions that undermine its artists. The spokesperson stressed that UMG adheres to “the highest ethical practices” in its marketing and promotional campaigns and that fans, not external manipulation, are the ones who decide what music they want to hear.
The statement further downplayed Drake’s legal filing, calling the “contrived and absurd legal arguments” in the pre-action petition insufficient to discredit the claim that fan demand drives a song’s popularity. This response reflects Universal’s stance that the success of Kendrick Lamar’s Not Like Us is simply the result of organic fan support and not any artificial manipulation.
The filing also came just days after Kendrick Lamar released a surprise album titled GNX, which is widely interpreted as a follow-up to Not Like Us. This timing adds an interesting layer to the ongoing dispute, as it could be seen as a continuation of Lamar’s momentum, following the success of the diss track. The release of GNX further fuels the rivalry and the stakes of the legal battle, with both artists seemingly gearing up for more action in their public feud.
Kendrick Lamar’s diss track Not Like Us has achieved significant recognition, recently being nominated for four Grammy awards, including the prestigious Song of the Year. Additionally, Lamar has secured a major career milestone, being booked to perform at next year’s Super Bowl halftime show, further cementing his status in the music industry.
Despite this growing recognition, Lamar still lags Drake in terms of global streaming popularity. On Spotify, Kendrick is currently ranked as the 23rd most-streamed artist in the world, while Drake holds a higher position at 13th. This disparity in streaming numbers highlights Drake’s continued dominance in the music industry, despite the critical acclaim Lamar has garnered for Not Like Us and his other projects. The contrast in their popularity, especially on platforms like Spotify, underscores the ongoing rivalry between the two artists.
