Drake has launched authorized motion in opposition to Common Music accusing the label of artificially boosting streams of Kendrick Lamar’s diss observe in opposition to him, Not Like Us.
In papers filed in New York, Drake’s firm, Frozen Moments LLC, accused Common and the streaming big Spotify of participating in an unlawful ”scheme” involving bots, payola and different strategies to advertise Lamar’s music.
Common Music ”didn’t depend on likelihood,” Drake’s attorneys alleged. “It as an alternative launched a marketing campaign to control and saturate the streaming providers and airwaves.”
A spokesperson for Common known as the claims “offensive and unfaithful”, including that “followers select the music they wish to hear”.
Spotify and Lamar have but to reply.
The petition isn’t a full lawsuit however a so-called “pre-action petition”, beneath which Drake’s attorneys can ask the courtroom to order Common and Spotify to protect all related paperwork and data, forward of future authorized motion.
The BBC understands the motion is principally aimed toward Common, with Spotify named within the perception it could have info that will be related to a lawsuit.
Not Like Us was extensively seen because the decisive blow in an escalating rap beef between Drake and Lamar earlier this 12 months.
Drake’s courtroom submitting highlights the music’s runaway success – 96 million streams in seven days, primary within the US charts, and a prime 10 radio hit – however suggests these achievements have been artificially inflated.
His attorneys declare that Common “conspired with and paid at the moment unknown events” to “artificially” enhance the prominence of Not Like Us.
They allege that the label minimize its royalty charges for the music by 30%, in trade for Spotify recommending it to customers.
The submitting additionally cites supposed claims from a “whistleblower” on a podcast, who mentioned they have been paid $2,500 to arrange software program ”bots” that will stream the music on repeat, turning it into “a loopy hit”.
The hassle unfold to different streaming providers, Drake’s attorneys allege, referencing on-line reviews that followers who requested Apple’s voice assistant to play Drake’s album Licensed Loverboy have been as an alternative delivered Not Like Us.
Drake loyalists ‘fired’
The authorized submitting is a shocking coda to the musicians’ feud, however it additionally represents a rift between Drake and Common – the label that has represented him for his total profession.
In courtroom paperwork, the star’s attorneys say he tried to handle these allegations in non-public however that the label has “no real interest in taking duty for its misconduct.”
Moreover, they declare Common made “an obvious effort to hide its schemes”, which included firing workers “perceived as having loyalty to Drake”.
“Streaming is a zero-sum recreation,” they argue. “Each time a music breaks by way of, it means one other artist doesn’t.” Because of this, they declare, Drake suffered “financial hurt” at Lamar’s expense.
A spokesperson for Common rejected the claims.
“The suggestion that UMG would do something to undermine any of its artists is offensive and unfaithful,” they mentioned in an announcement.
“We make use of the best moral practices in our advertising and marketing and promotional campaigns. No quantity of contrived and absurd authorized arguments on this pre-action submission can masks the truth that followers select the music they wish to hear.”
The authorized submitting got here days after Lamar launched a shock album, GNX, which is extensively seen as a follow-up to Not Like Us.
His diss observe was lately nominated for 4 Grammy awards, together with music of the 12 months, and he has been booked to play subsequent 12 months’s Tremendous Bowl halftime present.
Nevertheless, he lags behind Drake by way of reputation. On Spotify, the rapper is the twenty third most-streamed artist on this planet, whereas Drake locations thirteenth.
