Drake accuses Universal Music Group and Spotify of conspiring to artificially inflate Lamar’s diss track while suppressing his own music and alleges defamation in separate filings.

Drake has escalated his ongoing feud with Kendrick Lamar by filing two separate legal actions against Universal Music Group (UMG) and Spotify. The rapper, whose real name is Aubrey Graham, alleges that the music giant and streaming platform conspired to manipulate the popularity of Lamar’s diss track “Not Like Us,” using a variety of tactics to make the song appear more successful than it actually was. Alongside this, Drake is also accusing the companies of defamation, claiming that UMG released a track that falsely accused him of paedophilia.

In a petition filed to the New York Supreme Court on Monday, Drake’s lawyers, representing his company Frozen Moments LLC, outlined the accusations. They claim that UMG, in collaboration with Spotify, launched a covert campaign to “manipulate and saturate the streaming services and airwaves,” boosting the visibility and popularity of Lamar’s song. The petition goes as far as to allege that UMG used ‘bots’ to artificially inflate streams and promoted the track through social media influencers and pay-for-play agreements with radio stations.

One of the central claims in Drake’s petition is that UMG paid unknown parties to use automated bots, skewing the track’s popularity and deceiving consumers into thinking “Not Like Us” was a larger hit than it really was. This, according to Drake’s legal team, was part of a larger effort to harm Drake’s own career while benefiting Lamar’s. The petition claims that UMG’s tactics resulted in “Not Like Us” reaching a staggering 900 million streams, breaking records as the most-streamed diss track in Spotify history. It also set records for the most streams in a single day for a hip-hop song and the highest number of weekly streams for a rapper.

The legal drama took another turn the following day when Drake filed a defamation suit in Texas, accusing UMG of knowingly distributing the track despite its defamatory lyrics, which falsely accuse him of pedophilia. The petition claims that UMG had the power to halt the release of “Not Like Us” or demand edits to remove the damaging content but chose not to. Instead, UMG allegedly exploited the song’s controversy for financial gain, driving consumer hysteria and generating massive revenues for the label.

According to Drake’s lawyers, UMG’s actions go beyond simple mismanagement, alleging that the company’s executives sought to capitalize on the spectacle of harm caused to Drake’s reputation. “UMG designed, financed and then executed a plan to turn ‘Not Like Us’ into a viral mega-hit,” the petition reads. “This plan succeeded, likely beyond UMG’s wildest expectations.”

Drake’s team further claims that UMG’s motivation stemmed from a desire to benefit financially from Lamar’s success, which in turn led to a boost in streams of Lamar’s back catalogue. The petition also highlights that Drake repeatedly tried to engage with UMG to resolve the ongoing harm but was met with indifference. Instead of addressing the allegations, Drake claims UMG redirected him to Lamar, suggesting he pursue legal action against the rapper rather than the music company itself.

The situation has been compounded by claims that UMG took steps to cover up its actions. Drake’s lawyers allege that the company terminated employees who were perceived to be loyal to him, hinting at an effort to conceal the alleged conspiracy. The legal filings further suggest that UMG’s actions may violate the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), a statute typically used to tackle organised crime, as well as laws surrounding deceptive business practices and false advertising.

In response to the accusations, a spokesperson for UMG vehemently denied the claims, calling them “offensive and untrue.” They emphasised that the company operates with the highest ethical standards in marketing and promotional campaigns. “The suggestion that UMG would do anything to undermine any of its artists is offensive and untrue,” the spokesperson stated, adding that “fans choose the music they want to hear” and that these legal arguments do not change that fact. Spotify, meanwhile, declined to comment on the matter.

Both Drake and Lamar have longstanding associations with UMG, with Drake signed to Republic Records and Lamar to Interscope Records, both of which are subsidiaries of UMG. The accusations, however, have not only deepened the rivalry between the two rappers but have also brought into question the practices of the music industry’s most powerful players.

This legal battle, rooted in an escalating feud between two of hip-hop’s biggest stars, began when Lamar released a series of diss tracks aimed at Drake, including “Not Like Us.” In these songs, Lamar accused Drake of having inappropriate relationships with underage girls, among other personal attacks. Drake, in turn, responded with tracks of his own, hitting back with accusations of domestic abuse, and infidelity, and mocking Lamar’s physical appearance. Both artists have always denied any wrongdoing in their personal lives, but their war of words has now found its way into the courtroom.

As this legal drama unfolds, it is clear that the stakes are high for both parties. While the outcome of these cases will undoubtedly have significant consequences for Drake’s reputation and career, it also raises broader questions about the influence of major labels and streaming platforms in shaping the music industry.