Drake’s legal fight with Universal Music Group over Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us” is moving forward, with the rapper’s appeal now scheduled for oral arguments before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
The court has set December 4 as the date when lawyers representing Drake and UMG are expected to present their arguments before a panel of appeals court judges. The hearing comes after both sides submitted written arguments as part of the ongoing appeal process.
Oral arguments are an important stage in a federal appeal because they give the judges an opportunity to question the lawyers directly about the legal issues raised in the case. Once the arguments are heard, the panel can consider the briefs, the lower court record and what was presented during the hearing before issuing its decision.
Drake originally filed his lawsuit against UMG in early 2025 over the release and promotion of “Not Like Us,” Kendrick Lamar’s widely discussed diss track aimed at the Toronto rapper. Drake’s case alleged defamation, harassment and deceptive business practices connected to how UMG promoted the song.
The dispute centered in part on the lyrics and allegations contained in Lamar’s track. Drake argued that the song made serious claims about him that should be treated as factual statements rather than simply artistic expression.
A federal judge later dismissed the lawsuit in October 2025, finding that the lyrics at issue were protected opinion and did not amount to actionable defamation. That ruling became the focus of Drake’s subsequent appeal.
Drake’s legal team challenged that decision, arguing that the lower court’s reasoning could have consequences beyond the dispute between Drake and UMG. His lawyers said the ruling could establish a broad legal principle that makes it difficult for artists or music companies to face defamation claims involving statements made in diss tracks.
“The court effectively created an unprecedented and overbroad categorical rule that statements in rap diss tracks can never constitute statements of fact,” the appeal reads.
Drake’s lawyers also argued that the dismissal could create what they described as a “dangerous categorical rule,” potentially limiting the ability of people to pursue defamation claims when disputed statements appear in music.
UMG has defended its position throughout the case and has opposed Drake’s appeal. The company’s arguments, along with Drake’s, have already been presented to the Second Circuit through written filings ahead of the December hearing.
The appeal has also attracted attention from organizations and legal scholars who are not directly involved in the dispute but have an interest in how the court handles the issues surrounding artistic expression and defamation.
The Floyd Abrams Institute for Freedom of Expression at Yale and constitutional law scholar Professor Lyrissa Lidsky have filed a brief supporting UMG, while a separate group of social scientists and legal scholars has also submitted arguments in support of the record label.
Those outside briefs are significant because the case could have implications beyond Drake and UMG. The court’s eventual ruling could provide additional guidance on how defamation law applies when disputed statements appear in songs, particularly in the context of rap battles and diss tracks.
The case also highlights the tension between artistic expression and claims that lyrics contain statements that can cause reputational harm. Courts have traditionally had to consider the context in which statements are made when determining whether they should be treated as opinions, artistic expression or potentially actionable factual claims.
For Drake, the appeal represents another attempt to overturn the dismissal of his lawsuit. Rather than starting the case over, his legal team is asking the appeals court to review the lower court’s handling of the legal issues and determine whether the dismissal should stand.
The December 4 hearing will give the appeals judges an opportunity to question both sides directly. The panel will then consider the arguments and written submissions before reaching its decision.
There is no indication that a ruling will necessarily be issued immediately after the hearing. Federal appeals courts can take additional time to review the record and deliberate before releasing their decisions.
The outcome could therefore extend the legal dispute well beyond the December arguments. Until the Second Circuit issues its ruling, the lower court’s dismissal remains the decision currently in place.
For now, the December 4 hearing marks the next major moment in one of the most closely watched legal disputes connected to a major rap feud. What began with the promotion of “Not Like Us” has developed into a broader legal fight over defamation, artistic expression and the limits of statements made through music.
