Drake has officially escalated his legal fight over the song “Not Like Us,” filing an opening appellate brief this week that lays out his strongest argument yet that the record crossed from artistic expression into defamatory fact.
According to court filings, Drake submitted his opening appellate brief on Wednesday, challenging a lower court ruling that dismissed his defamation claims tied to the Kendrick Lamar diss track. In the brief, Drake’s legal team argues that the song made what they describe as an “unambiguous matter of fact,” specifically pointing to lyrics that label him a “certified pedophile.”
The appeal directly pushes back on the idea that diss tracks are automatically shielded from defamation claims. Drake’s attorneys argue that the court went too far in its original reasoning, writing that, “The court effectively created an unprecedented and overbroad categorical rule that statements in rap diss tracks can never constitute statements of fact.”
At the heart of the appeal is Drake’s contention that the scale and specificity of the accusation matter. While rap battles have long relied on exaggeration and insult, his legal team maintains that branding someone with a criminal designation, particularly one as serious as pedophilia, moves beyond metaphor or hyperbole and into reputational harm, especially when amplified by massive commercial success and media coverage.
“Not Like Us” became far more than a traditional diss record. The song dominated charts, soundtracked public events, and spilled into headlines and social media discourse well beyond the usual confines of rap beef. Drake’s camp argues that this reach magnified the damage, turning lyrics into widely accepted narratives rather than understood battle rhetoric.
The defense has continued to rely on First Amendment protections and the long standing cultural context of Hip Hop battles, where insults are often symbolic, competitive, and non literal. However, Drake’s appeal seeks to narrow that protection, asking the appellate court to recognize limits when lyrics present themselves as factual assertions about criminal conduct.
Legal analysts have noted that defamation cases tied to music face a high bar, but Drake’s appeal raises a broader question with implications beyond this feud. If courts accept the argument, it could reshape how diss records are evaluated in the age of viral media, where lyrics instantly become part of public discourse rather than remaining within a niche audience.
For now, the appeal ensures the case remains active and controversial. As the appellate court reviews the arguments, Drake’s challenge stands as a direct test of where artistic freedom ends and legal accountability begins in modern Hip Hop.