Drake has launched a second legal action against Universal Music Group over Kendrick Lamar's “Not Like Us,” accusing the music giant of defamation and claiming it could have stopped the release of a song “that falsely accused him of being a sex offender.” “.
A day after filing a lawsuit in New York accusing UMG of illegally boosting Lamar's track with Spotify payments, Drake's company filed similar claims in Texas court against radio giant iHeartRadio. The new filing, filed late Monday and made public Tuesday, alleges that UMG “channeled payments” to iHeart as part of a “pay-to-play scheme” to promote the song on radio.
But the filing also offers key new details about Drake's grievances with UMG, the company where he has spent his entire career. In it, he says UMG knew Kendrick's song “falsely” accused him of being a “certified pedophile” and a “predator,” but chose to release it anyway.
“UMG … could refuse to release or distribute the song or require the offending material to be edited and/or removed,” Drake's lawyers wrote. “But UMG chose to do the opposite. UMG devised, funded and then executed a plan to turn “Not Like Us” into a viral mega-hit in order to use the spectacle of damage to Drake and his businesses to drive consumer hysteria and, of course, massive income. This plan succeeded, probably beyond UMG's wildest expectations.”
Like the New York filing on Monday, the new filing is not quite a lawsuit. Instead, it's a so-called pre-action filing aimed at taking depositions from key figures at UMG and iHeart in order to obtain more information that could support Drake's accusations in a future lawsuit.
In seeking this information, Drake's lawyers say they already have enough evidence to pursue a “defamation claim” against UMG, but that they may also face fraud and extortion claims based on what they discover from the filings.
UMG and iHeartRadio did not immediately return requests for comment on the new filing. Lamar is not named as a defendant in the filing and is not legally accused of any wrongdoing.
Universal Music Group responded to yesterday's filing with a statement issued to Bulletin board. “The suggestion that UMG would go out of its way to undermine any of its artists is offensive and untrue,” the company said. “We use the highest ethical practices in our marketing and promotional campaigns. No amount of contrived and absurd legal arguments in this pre-action submission can hide the fact that fans choose the music they want to hear.”
Like Monday's bombshell plea, the new Texas filing is another notable escalation in the high-profile beef between the two stars, which saw Drake and Lamar trade diss jabs over a period of months earlier this year. Such beefs happen often in the hip-hop world, but few believed either side would pursue legal action over the insults.
It also represents a deepening of the rift between Drake and UMG, where the star has spent his entire career — first signing a deal with Lil Wayne's Young Money imprint, which was distributed by Republic Records, then signing directly to Republic. Lamar has also spent his entire career associated with UMG and is currently signed to a licensing deal with Interscope.
In Tuesday's new filing, Drake essentially accused the music giant of using illegal means to unfairly prioritize one of its artists over another.
“Before approving the release of the song, UMG knew that the song itself, as well as its accompanying album and music video, attacked the character of another of UMG's most influential artists, Drake, falsely accusing him of being sexist . perpetrator, engaging in pedophilic acts, harboring sex offenders and committing other criminal sexual acts,” his lawyers write.
from our partners at https://www.billboard.com/pro/drake-second-legal-action-umg-iheart-pay-for-play-defamation/
