Canadian rapper Drake has accused Universal Music Group (UMG), the record label representing both him and hip-hop icon Kendrick Lamar, of manipulating streaming platforms to unfairly promote Lamar’s music while suppressing his own. In a dramatic court filing obtained by The Independent, Drake, whose full name is Aubrey Drake Graham, alleges that UMG deployed bots and engaged in a pay-to-play scheme to flood streaming platforms and airwaves with Lamar’s diss track, “Not Like Us,” to his detriment. The song notably accuses Drake, a former child star, of being a “certified pedophile.”
According to the filing, UMG paid Spotify to recommend “Not Like Us” to users searching for unrelated artists and songs, and even collaborated with Apple to have Siri redirect users requesting Drake’s music to Lamar’s track instead. Drake claims this scheme falsely inflated the song’s popularity, creating the impression it was more successful than it actually was. Additionally, the filing accuses UMG of covering up these actions by firing employees perceived to be loyal to Drake, further intensifying the conflict within the label.
The filing, submitted by Drake and his company, Frozen Moments LLC, requests a court order directing UMG and Spotify to preserve all relevant documents and communications in preparation for an impending lawsuit. According to the petition, UMG has thus far “refused to engage” with Drake on the matter, instead shifting blame to Kendrick Lamar and advising Drake to pursue legal action against Lamar rather than the label itself.
A source close to Drake stated on Monday, shortly after the petition was filed in New York State Supreme Court, that Drake’s frustration is directed at UMG’s alleged unethical business practices, not Kendrick Lamar or his lyrics. (Drake has responded to Lamar’s accusations with diss tracks of his own, accusing the Compton rapper of being a domestic abuser and questioning the paternity of his child.) The source told The Independent that if Drake’s efforts to address misconduct in the industry succeed, it could set a precedent that protects lesser-known artists from similar exploitation.
In response to the allegations, a UMG spokesperson said in an email, “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, and Drake’s legal team also refrained from making any statements on the record.
Drake’s court filing highlights UMG’s close ties with Spotify, noting their multi-year global licensing agreement signed in 2020. UMG’s financial reports revealed $2.3 billion in revenue from Spotify in 2023, accounting for nearly 20% of the label’s total earnings. According to the filing, streaming revenue is critical to UMG’s success, and the label allegedly went beyond standard practices to ensure the success of Lamar’s latest release earlier this year.
It instead launched a campaign to manipulate and saturate the streaming services and airwaves with a song, ‘Not Like Us,’ in order to make that song go viral, including by using ‘bots’ and pay-to-play agreements,” the filing states, claiming UMG charged Spotify 30 percent less than its usual licensing rates in exchange for Spotify pushing recommendations for “Not Like Us” to “users who are searching for other unrelated songs and artists.”
“Neither UMG nor Spotify disclosed that Spotify had received compensation of any kind in exchange for recommending the Song,” the filing contends, claiming that such practices contravene the Communications Act of 1934.
In June, a “whistleblower” revealed on a podcast that Lamar’s label had paid him to set up a bot network that would generate 30 million streams on Spotify in the first few days after the May 3 release of “Not Like Us,” according to the filing. The leaker claimed he had been promised a cash payment plus a percentage of the song’s sales in exchange for his help. The filing says UMG also paid to quietly “inflate” the number of views Lamar’s “Not Like Us” video received, paid traditional radio stations for extra airplay, and claims the label’s alleged under-the-table streaming deals extended beyond Spotify.
“Online sources reported that when users asked Siri to play the album ‘Certified Loverboy’ by recording artist Aubrey Drake Graham d/b/a Drake, Siri instead played ‘Not Like Us,’ which contains the lyric ‘certified pedophile,’ an allegation against Drake,” the filing states.
UMG, additionally, paid social media influencers to “promote and endorse” Lamar’s song, without either side disclosing the financial arrangement, according to the filing, which says the arrangement generated nearly 900 million streams on Spotify for “Not Like Us,” a record for the most streams ever in a single day for a hip-hop song, and the most-streamed diss track in Spotify history. The song was also a massive hit on radio, and became the best-selling rap song of 2024, the filing states. The motivation behind UMG’s “schemes,” according to Drake’s filing, was entirely financial. It claims the colossal success of “Not Like Us” has, in turn, juiced sales of Lamar’s back catalog, making even more money for UMG.
Drake’s filing even alleges that he has “received information that UMG has been taking steps in an apparent effort to conceal its schemes, including, but not limited to, by terminating employees associated with or perceived as having loyalty to Drake.”
“Streaming and licensing is a zero-sum game,” the filing concludes. “Every time a song ‘breaks through,’ it means another artist does not. UMG’s choice to saturate the music market with ‘Not Like Us’ comes at the expense of its other artists, like Drake.”
Last month, nu-metal band Limp Bizkit sued UMG, claiming the label has not paid them despite their songs being streamed more than half a billion times.
Drake is accusing UMG and Spotify of violating the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), as well as the NY Deceptive Business Act and the NY False Advertising Act.
Discover more from ezone57 News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
