Introducing Endless Mode: A New Games & Anime Site from Paste
Here’s a real case of “in for a penny, in for a pound.” Despite the fact that Drake has surely lost the respect of both his peers and his own record label for filing a lawsuit over a lost rap battle, nevertheless he persists. On Wednesday, Drake filed an amended complaint in his suit over Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us,” arguing (per The Hollywood Reporter) that Lamar’s Super Bowl Half Time Show “assassinated” his character, and that the performance and Lamar’s Grammy wins “introduced new listeners to the Recording, causing even more people to be duped into believing that Drake was a pedophile.”
The supposed “gotcha” of Drake’s new complaint has to do with Lamar censoring the word “pedophile” out of his Super Bowl performance. “No other modifications were made,” the suit states (indeed: Lamar still taunted, “Say Drake, I hear you like ’em young,” warned listeners to “hide your lil’ sister from him,” and had everyone singing along to “A minor.”) “On information and belief, Kendrick Lamar would not have been permitted to perform during the Super Bowl Performance unless the word ‘pedophile’ (in the phrase ‘certified pedophiles’) was omitted from the lyrics—that is because nearly everyone understands that it is defamatory to falsely brand someone a ‘certified pedophile.'”
The suit goes on to argue that the platform of the Super Bowl—which became the most-watched halftime show ever—exposed the track (and, therefore, the “pedophile” allegation) to “millions more who had never before heard the song or any of the songs that preceded it.” The filing adds, “It was the first, and will hopefully be the last, Super Bowl halftime show orchestrated to assassinate the character of another artist.”
The irony, of course, is that Lamar anticipated this filing, adding a bit to his Super Bowl performance where he announced, “I wanna make a move… I wanna perform they favorite song, but you know they love to sue.” But it’s the rappers’ mutual record company Universal Music Group bearing the brunt of the legal action. After previously trying to get the case dismissed, UMG responded to the amended complaint with exasperation, stating (via Music Business Worldwide) that the suit had only added “more baseless allegations.”
“Drake, unquestionably one of the world’s most accomplished artists and with whom we’ve enjoyed a 16-year successful relationship, is being misled by his legal representatives into taking one absurd legal step after another,” the statement read. “Two weeks ago, his representatives celebrated a ‘win’: the granting of a routine discovery motion. That ‘win’ will become a loss if this frivolous and reckless lawsuit is not dropped in its entirety because Drake will personally be subject to discovery as well. As the old saying goes, ‘be careful what you wish for.'”
The statement concludes, “Both the Texas and New York proceedings are an affront to all artists and creative expression. Should his legal representatives senselessly keep the New York lawsuit alive, we will demonstrate that all remaining claims are without merit. It is shameful that these foolish and frivolous legal theatrics continue. They are reputationally and financially costly to Drake and have no chance of success.”
