I think Drake was gearing up for something else. Then 100 gigs. Then Super Bowl announcement. Then lawsuit petition. Then GNX. Then actual lawsuit. Etc.
It’s a bunch of back and forth moves.
UMG just cooked Drake ass lmfao - Call him anti-hip hop and say facts and criticism concerning Drake being a certified PDF have been widely reported
- Thread starter Mr 18
- Start date
It’s a bunch of back and forth moves.
JuvenileHell
Veteran
Drake isn't having a good year
Theo Penn
on that Earl Stevens wine
The fact that UMG has to lay out what the rules of engagement to a rap battle is in this paperwork is absolutely ridiculous. Drake moving like a bytch on some censorship shyt. UMG is on the right side here. You know you’re on some bullshyt if UMG is the side thats representing creative integrity.
A lot of these dudes aren’t real hip hop fans though. They don’t give a fukk about it. Pop music stans that want their crush to gain any semblance of a W. Sad shyt
The fact you think they can lay out the rules is nasty work.
Theo Penn
on that Earl Stevens wine
Of course they don’t define it. Did you read the paperwork? What I meant is that the paperwork says that the words exchanged in the battle is regular battle shyt and he willingly participated in it. Aubrey lost, threw a tantrum, and is trying to make it so battling comes with censorship.
kidsinamerica_
Rookie
Drake’s team wants to know: Did UMG stay neutral, or did they quietly shape the narrative behind the biggest rap battle in recent memory?
They claim UMG selectively loosened copyright restrictions on Kendrick’s Not Like Us, allowing it to gain wider traction online—while keeping Drake’s diss tracks, like Push Ups, under standard enforcement, limiting their reach.
Both artists reportedly allowed their diss tracks to circulate more freely, but Drake’s team questions whether UMG went further in promoting Kendrick’s track. Distributing both songs doesn’t automatically mean neutrality—if UMG removed copyright restrictions for one while keeping them for another, that raises questions about corporate influence.
UMG denies taking sides and has filed a motion to dismiss the case. With a hearing set for April, the court will decide whether discovery will move forward or if the case will be dismissed.
Rap beefs are a long-standing tradition in hip-hop, and this case isn’t challenging that. Nobody is arguing against diss tracks. The issue isn’t what artists say—it’s how record labels may have influenced which narratives get amplified.
Free expression is one thing; how corporations handle and promote content is another. The legal process will determine if UMG’s actions were standard industry practice or if they played a larger role in how this feud unfolded.
A year of L's.
@Day_Walker gives me bad rep and calls me a Canadian faq.
I know I can be terrifying but I think I'm a good person.
I'ma go cuddle with my girl now.
Oh, I'm 5 tracks recorded in my next 11 track album.
Get ready Coli, New Admiral Crumple album drops this year!
I'm committed to that! Word!
I know I can be terrifying but I think I'm a good person.
I'ma go cuddle with my girl now.
Oh, I'm 5 tracks recorded in my next 11 track album.
Get ready Coli, New Admiral Crumple album drops this year!
I'm committed to that! Word!
Nah cuh... Ain't no way you been in the game since 02.
Don't quit your day job.
Yes, this video was filmed in 2002, same with the album drop.
I always worked, so I make money off my Law Career, my investments and hip hop.
You talk in generic cliches from the 90s. Be more original.
I'm committed to earning so much off my Hip hop and investments that I don't have to work.
My sales are the highest they've ever been.
So take your dream killer self and tell that to your self, your children, your wife, and your family.
Not me, do you understand?
Last edited:
He still has yet to prove any of that. The one example he gave was bots, a claim that he and his team eventually agreed had no merit
Again, i'm asking you, how did UMG not show neutrality?
