Drake doesn’t think the success of “Not Like Us” was totally organic. Months after Kendrick Lamar’s Mustard-produced diss track dominated the charts and utterly derailed Drake’s plans for 2024 — which he was supposed to take off, anyway — Drake has filed a complaint in Manhattan court, claiming that the song’s streaming success was the result of collusion between Universal Music Group and Kendrick at his expense. The suit alleges UMG violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act and New York state laws against deceptive business practices and false advertising in the process.
Frozen Moments LLC, Drake’s corporate entity filed the suit today, arguing that UMG — which represents both rappers through licensing agreements — employed bots and payola schemes to inflate the numbers for “Not Like Us.” According to Frozen Moments attorneys, UMG “paid” Spotify — by charging “30 percent less than its usual licensing rates” — to recommend “Not Like Us” to users who weren’t even searching for it (or even similar songs), and did the same with Apple, so listeners requesting Drake songs via Siri would instead hear “Not Like Us.” In order to hide these practices, UMG supposedly fired employees perceived as loyal to Drake.
While it’s unclear why UMG would favor Kendrick Lamar over Drake, the roots of Drake’s dispute appear to stem from legit consumer complaints about DSPs pushing popular songs to listeners who don’t even want them, such as Sabrina Carpenter’s “Espresso,” which received pushback for appearing on auto-generated Spotify playlists even after fans took steps to stop the app doing so. However, opening that particular can of worms might not be to Drake’s benefit, even if he thinks it’ll gain him some vindication after waving the white flag in his war of words against the Compton prophet.