Drake has taken legal action against Universal Music Group (UMG), accusing the label of engaging in manipulative practices to promote Kendrick Lamar’s diss track They Not Like Us while simultaneously working to diminish his own influence. The lawsuit alleges that UMG used bots, paid influencers, and even manipulated streaming services to ensure Kendrick’s track gained massive traction. But this isn’t just about industry politics—it’s about power, control, and legacy.
The feud between Drake and Kendrick Lamar escalated following They Not Like Us, a scathing diss track that questioned Drake’s character and career. The song quickly went viral, dominating playlists and sparking intense online debates. However, Drake claims that its success wasn’t entirely organic. According to the legal documents, UMG allegedly deployed bots to inflate Spotify streams, made secret payments to radio stations, and even ignored copyright violations to ensure the song’s prominence.
The lawsuit also accuses UMG of engaging in payola—a practice where labels secretly fund airplay for their artists. This isn’t a new controversy for UMG, which was previously fined $12 million in 2006 for similar tactics. Drake argues that these methods were used to push Kendrick’s song to the forefront while simultaneously suppressing his own music and damaging his reputation.
However, this legal battle goes beyond just a chart war. Drake suggests that UMG’s tactics are part of a broader strategy to undermine artists who gain too much power. He points to his own success—owning his catalog, generating billions in revenue, and maintaining influence over his career—as a reason why UMG allegedly sees him as a threat.
What makes this case even more explosive is Drake’s insinuation that similar tactics may have been used against legendary artists like Michael Jackson and Prince. Both artists famously fought for control over their music and had disputes with record labels, including UMG. Jackson, in particular, took legal action against a UMG subsidiary in 2003, alleging that they withheld royalties and released his music without consent. Some fans speculate that his legal battles and the negative media coverage surrounding him were orchestrated attempts to diminish his power.
Prince also waged a long fight against the music industry, famously changing his name to a symbol to protest Warner Bros.’ control over his music. He advocated for artists’ rights and independence from major labels. His sudden passing in 2016 only fueled conspiracy theories about the extent to which labels might go to maintain control over high-profile artists.
Drake’s lawsuit hints at potential violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act—laws typically associated with organized crime. If the claims hold up in court, they could expose long-standing industry practices and shake the foundation of the music business.
Beyond the legal ramifications, the fallout from this lawsuit could redefine the power dynamics between artists and record labels. If UMG is found guilty of manipulating the industry to serve its interests, it could encourage other artists to take similar action. The case raises an important question: How much control should labels have over the careers of their artists?
Drake believes that UMG’s decision to promote They Not Like Us was not just about Kendrick Lamar’s success but about sending a message—no artist, regardless of their fame, is bigger than the label. This sentiment echoes similar struggles faced by artists throughout music history, including Michael Jackson, Prince, and more recently, Taylor Swift, who fought for control over her masters.
As the case unfolds, the music industry is bracing for potential fallout. If Drake wins, it could set a precedent that forces record labels to operate with more transparency and fairness. If he loses, it may reinforce the idea that major labels still hold the ultimate power over even the biggest artists in the world.
What do you think about Drake’s claims? Could this lawsuit expose deeper corruption within the music industry, or is it just another high-profile feud? Let us know your thoughts as we continue to follow this developing story.
