Legally, If the label is one that negotiates contracts they have certain control of Kendrick. They could have said no to the Super Bowl. Now is that crazy, sure but it’s a valid argument. If they are the ones handling the logistics of the concert it was performed at, they have a certain amount of control over Kendrick. It doesn’t have to be complete control, but notice was given, and they were part of the defamation that occurred. They “set the stage” for it.
Also Drakes argument is simple look at the tour he just canceled. He also said something about a shooting and touring, and putting his kid in a new school.
By Samuel A. Lopez - USA Herald Drake has officially settled his dispute with iHeartMedia, but his legal battle against Universal Music Group (UMG) is far from over. The Toronto-born rapper remains locked in a high-stakes defamation lawsuit against UMG, accusing the music conglomerate of...
usaherald.com
Drake has a strong defamation case. He just does. I am not trying to get into Drake vs. Kendrick I am just telling ya’ll what it is. He’s probably done in rap but he is gonna get paid. All these snide jokes aren’t jokes when defamation is involved it’s evidence that your reputation has been shot.