Tweet
Drake has initiated legal action against Universal Music Group (UMG) and Spotify over allegations that the two companies conspired to artificially inflate the popularity of Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us.”
In a filing Monday (Nov. 25) in Manhattan court, Drake’s Frozen Moments LLC accuses UMG of launching an illegal “scheme” involving bots, payola and other methods to pump up Lamar’s song — a track that savagely attacked Drake amid an ongoing feud between the two stars.
“UMG did not rely on chance, or even ordinary business practices,” attorneys for Drake’s company write. “It instead launched a campaign to manipulate and saturate the streaming services and airwaves.”
Drake’s attorneys accuse UMG of violating the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, the federal “RICO” statute often used in criminal cases against organized crime. They also allege deceptive business practices and false advertising under New York state law.
The court filings are a remarkable twist in the high-profile beef between the two stars, which saw Drake and Lamar exchange stinging diss tracks over a period of months earlier this year. That such a dispute would spill into business litigation seemed almost unthinkable in the world of hip-hop.
It also represents a stunning rift between Drake and UMG, where the star has spent his entire career — first through signing a deal with Lil Wayne’s Young Money imprint, which was distributed by Republic Records, then by signing directly to Republic.
Lamar, meanwhile, has also spent his entire career associated with UMG — first through the TDE imprint, which was distributed by Interscope, and more recently through his own company, pgLang, which he licenses through Interscope.
In technical terms, Monday’s filing is not yet a full lawsuit, but a so-called “pre-action” petition — a procedure under New York law that aims to secure information before filing a lawsuit. Parties named in such petitions will not necessarily be targeted in the eventual lawsuit, and the allegations in Monday’s filing seem more squarely aimed at UMG than Spotify.
In a statement to Billboard, a UMG spokesperson sharply denied Drake’s allegations: “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. No amount of contrived and absurd legal arguments in this pre-action submission can mask the fact that fans choose the music they want to hear.”
Spotify declined to comment on the allegations when reached by Billboard.
Drake’s attorneys claim that UMG carried out its “scheme” in a variety of ways, including by charging Spotify vastly reduced licensing rates in exchange for the streamer recommending the song to users who had searched for “unrelated songs and artists.” They also claim UMG paid influencers to boost the song on social media and also hired armies of bots to fraudulently spike the numbers.
“UMG … conspired with and paid currently unknown parties to use ‘bots’ to artificially inflate the spread of ‘Not Like Us’ and deceive consumers into believing the song was more popular than it was in reality,” Drake’s lawyers write.
In one particularly eye-catching claim, the petition claims that UMG paid Apple to have its voice assistant feature Siri “purposely misdirect users” to Kendrick’s song.
“Online sources reported that when users asked Siri to play the album ‘Certified Lover Boy’ by [Drake], Siri instead played ‘Not Like Us,’ which contains the lyric ‘certified pedophile,’ an allegation against Drake,” the rapper’s lawyers write.
Apple is not named as a respondent in the petition nor accused of any legal wrongdoing. A spokesperson for the company did not immediately return a request for comment.
Why would UMG choose to aggressively boost Lamar’s song? Drake’s lawyers say it was partially because of the internal corporate dynamics at UMG and Interscope, where financial incentives for executives are “largely based on the specific UMG division, rather than the performance of UMG more generally.”
“UMG’s schemes … were motivated, at least in part, by the desire of executives at Interscope to maximize their own profits,” Drake’s attorneys write. “Executives at Interscope have been incentivized to maximize the financial success of Interscope through the promotion of ‘Not Like Us’ and its revitalizing impact on the artist’s prior recording catalog.”
Drake’s attorneys say he raised the issue with UMG before heading to court, but that the music giant has “no interest in taking responsibility for its misconduct.” To the contrary, he claims UMG has actively tried to conceal its wrongdoing, including by firing staffers “perceived as having loyalty to Drake.”
“Drake has repeatedly sought to engage UMG in discussions to resolve the ongoing harm he has suffered as a result of UMG’s actions,” the petition reads. “UMG refused to engage in negotiations, and insisted that UMG is not responsible for its own actions.”
Instead, Drake says UMG has “pointed the finger” at Lamar and insisted that Drake should sue his rival rather than the label. He also claims that UMG told him that the label would sue Lamar if Drake ended up filing his own lawsuit.
Source
In a filing Monday (Nov. 25) in Manhattan court, Drake’s Frozen Moments LLC accuses UMG of launching an illegal “scheme” involving bots, payola and other methods to pump up Lamar’s song — a track that savagely attacked Drake amid an ongoing feud between the two stars.
“UMG did not rely on chance, or even ordinary business practices,” attorneys for Drake’s company write. “It instead launched a campaign to manipulate and saturate the streaming services and airwaves.”
Drake’s attorneys accuse UMG of violating the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, the federal “RICO” statute often used in criminal cases against organized crime. They also allege deceptive business practices and false advertising under New York state law.
The court filings are a remarkable twist in the high-profile beef between the two stars, which saw Drake and Lamar exchange stinging diss tracks over a period of months earlier this year. That such a dispute would spill into business litigation seemed almost unthinkable in the world of hip-hop.
It also represents a stunning rift between Drake and UMG, where the star has spent his entire career — first through signing a deal with Lil Wayne’s Young Money imprint, which was distributed by Republic Records, then by signing directly to Republic.
Lamar, meanwhile, has also spent his entire career associated with UMG — first through the TDE imprint, which was distributed by Interscope, and more recently through his own company, pgLang, which he licenses through Interscope.
In technical terms, Monday’s filing is not yet a full lawsuit, but a so-called “pre-action” petition — a procedure under New York law that aims to secure information before filing a lawsuit. Parties named in such petitions will not necessarily be targeted in the eventual lawsuit, and the allegations in Monday’s filing seem more squarely aimed at UMG than Spotify.
In a statement to Billboard, a UMG spokesperson sharply denied Drake’s allegations: “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. No amount of contrived and absurd legal arguments in this pre-action submission can mask the fact that fans choose the music they want to hear.”
Spotify declined to comment on the allegations when reached by Billboard.
Drake’s attorneys claim that UMG carried out its “scheme” in a variety of ways, including by charging Spotify vastly reduced licensing rates in exchange for the streamer recommending the song to users who had searched for “unrelated songs and artists.” They also claim UMG paid influencers to boost the song on social media and also hired armies of bots to fraudulently spike the numbers.
“UMG … conspired with and paid currently unknown parties to use ‘bots’ to artificially inflate the spread of ‘Not Like Us’ and deceive consumers into believing the song was more popular than it was in reality,” Drake’s lawyers write.
In one particularly eye-catching claim, the petition claims that UMG paid Apple to have its voice assistant feature Siri “purposely misdirect users” to Kendrick’s song.
“Online sources reported that when users asked Siri to play the album ‘Certified Lover Boy’ by [Drake], Siri instead played ‘Not Like Us,’ which contains the lyric ‘certified pedophile,’ an allegation against Drake,” the rapper’s lawyers write.
Apple is not named as a respondent in the petition nor accused of any legal wrongdoing. A spokesperson for the company did not immediately return a request for comment.
Why would UMG choose to aggressively boost Lamar’s song? Drake’s lawyers say it was partially because of the internal corporate dynamics at UMG and Interscope, where financial incentives for executives are “largely based on the specific UMG division, rather than the performance of UMG more generally.”
“UMG’s schemes … were motivated, at least in part, by the desire of executives at Interscope to maximize their own profits,” Drake’s attorneys write. “Executives at Interscope have been incentivized to maximize the financial success of Interscope through the promotion of ‘Not Like Us’ and its revitalizing impact on the artist’s prior recording catalog.”
Drake’s attorneys say he raised the issue with UMG before heading to court, but that the music giant has “no interest in taking responsibility for its misconduct.” To the contrary, he claims UMG has actively tried to conceal its wrongdoing, including by firing staffers “perceived as having loyalty to Drake.”
“Drake has repeatedly sought to engage UMG in discussions to resolve the ongoing harm he has suffered as a result of UMG’s actions,” the petition reads. “UMG refused to engage in negotiations, and insisted that UMG is not responsible for its own actions.”
Instead, Drake says UMG has “pointed the finger” at Lamar and insisted that Drake should sue his rival rather than the label. He also claims that UMG told him that the label would sue Lamar if Drake ended up filing his own lawsuit.
Source
Comment