Drake's ongoing legal battle with Universal Music Group (UMG) has taken another turn as his court hearing, initially scheduled for December 20, 2024, in Texas, has been postponed due to a miscommunication.
This hearing was set to address Drake's allegations against UMG concerning Kendrick Lamar's track "Not Like Us." The Canadian rapper claims that UMG engaged in illegal activities to artificially boost the song's popularity, including using bots and payola to inflate streaming numbers and radio play.
The delay in the hearing was confirmed by journalist Bryson Paul, who reported from the courthouse that the schedule was miscommunicated after an initial hearing was dropped.
Drake's attorney submitted a letter requesting a new date, which has now been set for January 13, 2025. Despite the postponement, the petition remains active, and the clerks have apologized for the scheduling error.
This Texas filing is the second of two similar legal actions initiated by Drake in November 2024. The first was filed in a Manhattan court, where Drake alleged that UMG used deceptive practices to promote "Not Like Us," including paying Spotify to feature the song prominently. A decision on this matter is expected on January 16, 2025.
Drake's accusations extend beyond UMG to include iHeartRadio, which he alleges received payola from UMG to air the song. He also claims that the track falsely accuses him of being a sex offender, providing grounds for a potential defamation lawsuit against the music giant.
In response to these allegations, Spotify has vehemently denied any involvement in such schemes. In a formal response filed in Manhattan court, Spotify described Drake's claims as "far-fetched" and questioned why they were even implicated in the dispute between Drake and Kendrick Lamar.
The streaming service's lawyers argued that there is no evidence to support the allegations of streaming bots or illicit deals with UMG, stating, "The predicate of Petitioner’s entire request for discovery from Spotify is false."
Spotify further criticized Drake for filing a pre-action petition instead of a formal lawsuit, suggesting that his allegations lack substance and would likely be dismissed in court. "This subversion of the normal judicial process should be rejected," the company asserted.
The legal filings have sparked discussions among industry experts, with some expressing skepticism about the strength of Drake's case. An anonymous entertainment lawyer commented that the disagreement "gets nowhere near trial" due to the challenges of proving defamation and the speculative nature of the claims.
They noted, "The streaming bots and the pay-for-play thing, I’m assuming he feels strongly that there’s some documentation that can prove this. Ultimately, it doesn’t change anything about this battle, though."
Universal Music Group has also responded to the allegations, dismissing them as baseless. The company stated, "The suggestion that UMG would do anything to undermine any of its artists is offensive and untrue. We employ the highest ethical practices in our marketing and promotional campaigns."
Despite the legal wrangling, some observers speculate that Drake's actions may be part of a broader strategy. There is speculation that he might be seeking leverage over UMG to potentially renegotiate his contract or exit his deal. Others believe he aims to cast doubt on the success of "Not Like Us" to counter the narrative that he lost the so-called "great rap war" with Kendrick Lamar.
Comments