Hi, everyone. Upthony Datetano here, the Internet's busiest music nerd. We have to do a bit of an update on this ongoing lawsuit between Drake and his label, UMG.

Even though the progress of this whole thing is slow going as of right now, the longer this lawsuit looms, the more of a long-standing impact I think it's going to have on diss tracks, on beef within hip hop. I think that may end up being the case, even if this case doesn't end up making it all the way to court.

Now, look, just in case you've been living under a rock and you were not fully aware, Drake, one of the biggest rappers of the modern era, of all time, in fact, one day, he had a beef with fellow rapper, Kendrick Lamar. The two of them went back and forth for a bit, track for track, as it were. A great deal of the audience to these tracks, many would say the majority of people, pretty much came away from that whole thing with the strongly held belief that Drake lost in that situation. He lost. Did not come out of this beef looking all that great. And not only that, but one of the tracks Kendrick made in response to Drake went on to be a massive, massive hit, a Grammy-winning song that was recently performed at a Super Bowl halftime show.

Now, even though Drake is no longer recording new songs in response to Kendrick Lamar to fire back at him, he is not disengaged from this situation. His steps from here have been more legal than lyrical and haven't been directed at Kendrick as much as the label they both share, UMG, with Drake and his lawyers pretty much making the argument that UMG should be held responsible for the defamatory remarks in the commercially released Kendrick songs. Specifically "Not Like Us", where Drake is said to be a pedialyte drinker, among other things.

Drake's initial legal actions evolved into a fully fledged lawsuit in which he laid a lot of allegations, not only claims about the defamatory nature of these songs, but also saying that Universal had a hand in faking the popularity of the track, astro-turfing its relevancy in some way.

Now, UMG's most recent reaction to Drake and his lawsuit, and there have been a few, has come in the form of a file to dismiss this lawsuit entirely. Basically, for UMG, one of the options they have here to potentially win and save themselves a lot of headaches and a lot of money is file a motion here that even prevents the case from going to court through this dismissal, saying that Drake's lawsuit, his allegations, everything surrounding it are so outlandish and ridiculous and preposterous that they're not even worth the court taking seriously.

"Nowhere in the 100-plus page 'legal' blather written by Drake's lawyers, do they bother to acknowledge that Drake himself has written and performed massively successful songs containing equally provocative taunts against other artists. Nor do they mention that it was Drake who started this particular exchange. Apparently, Drake's lawyers believe that when Drake willingly participates in a performative rap battle of music and poetry, he can be defamed even though he engages in the exact same form of creative expression. Drake's lawyers can also keep seeking to uncover evidence of wild conspiracies as to why one song that upset Drake had massive global appeal. But there is nothing to uncover despite his lawyer's attempts to silence other artists and threaten the companies that work with them. We remain committed to propelling Drake's career while maintaining our unwavering support for all of our artists' creative expression, Drake's included." - UMG Spokesperson

Apparently, they also make reference to Drake, essentially teasing Kendrick into engaging with him on this issue of liking young girls by bringing up a bar from his "Taylor Made Freestyle".

Look, I'm sure that a lot of you readin this, and I myself, find these arguments to be very compelling. Like, I mean, it is true. This was a rap battle that Drake volunteered his time and effort for. He engaged in it fully and has also thrown out remarks about a load of other artists on his songs in the past, many of which I'm sure he wouldn't like to be held liable for in court.

But as ridiculous as all of it may seem on the surface, the chance of this case actually going to court and either UMG losing or some embarrassing of information coming to light in the discovery process of this lawsuit moving forward, it's not zero. The chances are not zero. I mean, again, as ridiculous as it may seem, Drake has been continually and persistently putting UMG here in the hot seat. I think they are feeling the pressure.

While, yes, it's true, I do think the bars in Kendrick's songs, and really all the bars in all diss tracks artists may share between each other, need to be looked at in their proper historical and cultural context. Still, the fact remains, with this lawsuit and with these diss songs, we are wading into pretty much uncharted legal territory.

Because when you're talking about historical precedent for defamation law, there's not a lot of hard legislation that's been passed or cases we can look to to say what exactly the legal system's positions are when it comes to taking rap lyrics literally or too seriously. I mean, just recently we saw many a lyric be used against Young Thug in the legal trials that he just basically escaped by the skin of his teeth.

So again, to state it clearly, when it comes to defamation law and defamation cases, there are no hard and fast examples we can look to to say, 'Oh, well, that was said in a diss track, so it's all cool. It doesn't count as defamation, man.' UMG even goes on to characterize the bars in Kendrick's tracks as being non-actionable opinion and rhetorical hyperbole.

I mean, sure. I think there's an interpretation along those lines that you can't say is total BS. Simultaneously, you were there. I was there. We listened to the tracks. We enjoyed them. We were entertained. And as wild and as over the top as some of the bars on those Kendrick tracks are, he was saying that shit with his chest, man. He was saying that shit. And in my opinion, not necessarily putting it out there with the implication that like, 'Oh, hey, listen, I'm only joshin' here, man. It wasn't that friendly of a fade, if you know what I'm saying.'

I mean, look, Kendrick said what he said on those songs, and you can't really deny that it's had some measurable impact on Drake's public image. I mean, that's the point of tracks like that. I'm going to go at you on these songs and spit venom at you in order to embarrass you and make you look in the eyes of the people who are watching this whole thing. You are my competitor. I'm going to tear you up and drag your name through the mud. That's literally the point. That is literally the intent behind a track like "Not Like Us".

Now, with that being said, do I personally think a song such as that should be legally actionable, especially from an artist who openly engaged in multiple musical responses before "Not Like Us" was released? Again, no. My stance is very much no.

But simultaneously, I think UMG signed on to essentially releasing these tracks commercially without fully thinking about what they were platforming here before they did, just being blinded with all the dollar signs being thrown at them, and didn't really take into consideration that a lawsuit such as this might be a reality, and it would go through a court system that, historically, doesn't do well with interpreting rap lyrics, seemingly doesn't really know what to do with them other than take them at face value again and again and again.

And as bad of a look within hip hop circles, this whole lawsuit has been for Drake. I do have to say I do think it was a smart move for him and his lawyers to try to hold UMG accountable for all of this as opposed to Kendrick Lamar himself. Such a move does frame this legal battle in a way, in the eyes of many, that makes it more valid and legitimate. It's less about me versus this one single guy, Kendrick, and now it's me, Drake, versus the machine, the music industry, UMG.

Now, is this what I personally think? No, not even a little bit by a long shot. Drake is not some crazy outsider renegade who's taking the music industry to task on his own. He's maybe one of the biggest products of the music industry in the last 10 years. If he's doing anything at this point, he is biting the hand that feeds him and making the owner of that hand, UMG, responsible for his own dumb decisions.

But it still remains that one of Drake's prime talents is being able to frame a narrative. He's so good at it that his audience instantly adopts whatever perspective he's trying to lay onto them. Even when someone like me disagrees with him, I still believe there's a real possibility he may, in fact, be deluded enough to actually believe the cause that he's fighting for here.

But yes, again, as cool, calm, and collected as UMG has been so far in the public face of all of this, I'm sure behind the they're sitting there and praying like, 'Please, please, please, please, please, please, please dismiss this God damned lawsuit. And look, even if that does happen, I think UMG and the other major labels are going to think twice when it comes to platforming, any sort of diss tracks like this, again, on the off chance that maybe they get held accountable for them on some level in court.

For now, I'm going to leave it there until something else of note happens or is worth talking about. Let me know what you guys think about all of this in the comments right now.

Anthony Fantano, Drake, UMG, Lawsuit, Forever.