Universal Music last week asked the Texas courts to dismiss a petition filed against it by Drake back in November. The petition was one of two legal filings made by Drake last year that pre-empted the big defamation lawsuit he then filed against Universal, his long-time label, earlier this month. Like the defamation litigation, the petitions related to Kendrick Lamar’s Drake-dissing track ‘Not Like Us’.
Although Universal is yet to formally respond to the defamation lawsuit in court, its statements to the media have been keen to position the litigation as Drake attempting to silence another artist, Lamar, through the courts. As a result, it argues that its legal battle with Drake is all about standing up for the First Amendment free speech rights of Lamar.
It is also relying on free speech arguments in its bid to get the separate petition in the Texas courts dismissed. Specifically so called anti-SLAPP laws in Texas, rules that seek to stop legal action being employed in order to silence third parties and breach their First Amendment free speech rights.
According to Variety, Universal’s lawyers argue that the relevant anti-SLAPP laws mean that the ‘burden of proof’ in relation to the allegations made by Drake against the major falls on the musician. That means he needs to provide solid evidence to the court that backs up his claims.
But, it argues, he has failed to do so because all of his claims rely on statements made by “unnamed” and “unidentified” individuals, which means those claims amount to nothing more than “hearsay” and are “not admissible as evidence”.
Drake petitioned courts in both New York and Texas last November seeking to force Universal - as well as Spotify and iHeart - to hand over documents relating to the promotion of ‘Not Like Us’. He alleged that the major had employed unethical and illegal practices to turn ‘Not Like Us’ into a viral hit, including stream manipulation and payola.
The petition in the New York court was subsequently withdrawn and replaced with the full-on lawsuit accusing Universal of defamation for releasing Lamar’s track, the lyrics of which accuse Drake of being a pedophile.
Although seeking to hold a label liable for defamation in relation to the lyrics in a hip hop diss track seems somewhat ambitious, Drake argues that - despite him having worked with Universal for fifteen years - it recklessly released and promoted a track which, through its lyrical allegations, has jeopardised the safety of both him and his family.
The defamation lawsuit outlines a shooting and break-ins at Drake’s Toronto home which, it says, were a direct result of the claims made in Lamar’s diss track.