- Drake adds Super Bowl LVIII performance to ongoing defamation case against Universal Music Group
- Halftime show reached over 130 million viewers, allegedly amplifying false allegations
- Lawsuit claims UMG manipulated Grammy nominations and orchestrated public performances
- Toronto police report 3 security incidents linked to diss track fallout
- Music attorneys debate precedent for holding labels accountable for artist feuds
The hip-hop world's most explosive rivalry has entered uncharted legal territory as Drake escalates his defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group. New court filings reveal fresh allegations centered on Kendrick Lamar's controversial Super Bowl halftime performance, which attorneys claim deliberately weaponized false pedophilia accusations against the Canadian superstar. Industry analysts note this marks the first time a major label faces direct liability claims for creative content in a celebrity feud.
Legal documents emphasize the strategic timing of Lamar's performance during contract renegotiations with UMG, suggesting corporate manipulation of public perception. While Lamar omitted the word pedophileduring the live broadcast, Drake's legal team argues the altered lyrics still conveyed defamatory meaning to millions of first-time listeners. Security camera footage from Drake's Toronto mansion, included in exhibits, shows armed intruders referencing Lamar's lyrics during a February break-in attempt.
Music industry professionals remain divided on the case's merits. Labels typically maintain creative neutrality in artist disputes,notes entertainment lawyer Alicia Monroe. If discovery proves UMG actively promoted specific defamatory content, this could rewrite standard recording contracts.The lawsuit cites a 2022 UK High Court ruling where a label was found partially liable for unchecked slander in song lyrics, establishing potential international precedent.
UMG's motion to dismiss argues Drake willingly participated in the rap battle culture that birthed Not Like Us,with internal analytics showing his diss tracks generated 83M more streams than Lamar's responses. However, Drake's filings counter that UMG violated its fiduciary duty by promoting content endangering his safety. Forensic accountants estimate the security upgrades and brand damage could exceed $47M in losses.
As the discovery phase begins, all eyes turn to UMG's executive communications regarding Lamar's Super Bowl selection. Leaked production emails already reveal debates about censoring specific lyrics, which Drake's team claims demonstrates corporate awareness of defamation risks. The case's outcome could force labels to implement new legal review protocols for diss tracks and competitive artist marketing.
