Common Music Group CEO Sir Lucian Grainge has filed a sworn declaration pushing again in opposition to Drake’s makes an attempt to drive him to supply paperwork within the rapper’s defamation lawsuit. Grainge describes the artist’s claims in that go well with as “farcical” and “groundless.”
Within the declaration, filed on August 14 within the US District Court docket for the Southern District of New York and obtained by MBW, Grainge states that he “had by no means heard the recording ‘Not Like Us,’ nor ever noticed the corresponding cowl artwork or music video, till after they had been launched by Interscope Data.”
Provides Grainge: “While, as a part of my function, I actually have monetary oversight of and accountability for UMG’s international companies, the proposition that I used to be concerned in, a lot much less liable for, reviewing and approving the content material of ‘Not Like Us’, its cowl artwork or music video, or for figuring out or directing the promotion of these supplies, is groundless and certainly ridiculous.”
“The premise of Drake’s movement — that he couldn’t have misplaced a rap battle until it was the product of some imagined secret conspiracy going to the highest of UMG’s company construction — is absurd.”
UMG’s authorized reps
Drake’s authorized crew had sought to compel UMG so as to add Grainge as a doc custodian of their ongoing discovery battle, claiming the corporate’s international CEO was personally concerned in approving Kendrick Lamar’s diss observe Not Like Us, which types the idea of Drake’s defamation case in opposition to UMG.
Nonetheless, in a strongly-worded letter to the courtroom opposing Drake’s movement, UMG’s legal professionals known as the request “a clear try to make use of discovery to harass UMG and drive it to waste time and sources out of spite”.
“The premise of Drake’s movement — that he couldn’t have misplaced a rap battle until it was the product of some imagined secret conspiracy going to the highest of UMG’s company construction — is absurd,” UMG’s attorneys wrote of their August 14 submitting.
Grainge dismisses “wild conspiracy” claims
In his declaration, Grainge instantly addresses Drake’s allegations, stating that the declare he was behind a scheme to “devalue” Drake’s model by the discharge and promotion of Not Like Us “is mindless as a consequence of the truth that the corporate that I run, Common Music Group N.V., has invested tons of of thousands and thousands of {dollars} in Drake, together with longstanding and important monetary help for his recording profession, the acquisition and possession of the majority of his recording catalog, and the acquisition of his music publishing rights.”
The UMG CEO additional defined that he runs “a publicly-traded, multi-billion greenback, multi-national company whose operations in over sixty nations masking practically 200 markets finally report as much as me”.
“Common Music Group has invested tons of of thousands and thousands of {dollars} in Drake, together with longstanding and important monetary help for his recording profession, the acquisition and possession of the majority of his recording catalog, and the acquisition of his music publishing rights.”
Sir Lucian Grainge, UMG
Drake’s first run of basic studio albums – together with Scorpion, Extra Life, Views, Nothing Was The Similar, and Take Care – had been signed to Money Cash/Younger Cash Data.
As MBW has beforehand lined, Common Music Group confirmed it purchased Money Cash catalog , together with the Drake recordings, in an investor replace in 2021.
Since 2021’s Licensed Lover Boy, Drake has owned his trendy recordings, launched by way of OVO/Republic.
Grainge’s declaration continues: “Our enterprise encompasses over 100 report labels (in addition to a multinational music publishing division, international merchandise and direct to shopper companies, the worldwide Virgin Music label companies, brief and lengthy kind audiovisual manufacturing, and a wide range of different companies), every with its personal CEO/President and its personal administration construction.
“Collectively these companies subject tens of hundreds of releases and product every month. My focus is on creating and implementing the worldwide technique that may form UMG for generations to return.
“I additional acknowledge {that a} frequent technique of UMG’s litigation opponents is to try to waste my and UMG’s time and sources with discovery of the kind that Drake is in search of right here — both in an try to achieve media consideration or in an effort to drive some type of business renegotiation or monetary concessions.”
Sir Lucian Grainge, UMG
“In mild of this accountability, the proposition that I’m within the weeds as to the discharge and promotion of any explicit sound recording, from the hundreds of UMG releases all through the world, is farcical“.
Grainge additionally addressed the sample of such discovery requests in litigation, stating: “I’m accustomed (and sadly largely resigned) to private assaults, and I additional acknowledge {that a} frequent technique of UMG’s litigation opponents is to try to waste my and UMG’s time and sources with discovery of the kind that Drake is in search of right here — both in an try to achieve media consideration or in an effort to drive some type of business renegotiation or monetary concessions.”
UMG opposes “intrusive” monetary discovery requests
In a separate letter filed the identical day, UMG’s legal professionals opposed Drake’s calls for for in depth monetary information, together with Interscope CEO John Janick‘s compensation particulars courting again to 2021, Interscope’s month-to-month revenues and earnings over a number of years, and paperwork exhibiting the worth of Lamar’s recording catalogue since January 2020.
“Drake’s second letter-motion seeks to compel the manufacturing of paperwork responding to sure requests for manufacturing,” UMG’s attorneys wrote. “As along with his movement regarding Sir Lucian Grainge, this movement is nothing however an apparent try to misuse the invention course of to pursue irrelevant and overbroad requests principally calculated to harass, embarrass or annoy Drake’s perceived adversaries.”
The corporate argued that Drake’s request for John Janick’s non-public compensation particulars going again 4 years earlier than “Not Like Us” was even launched fails to fulfill relevance requirements.
“Drake manufactures the idea for such a motive out of skinny air, speculating that as a result of UMG’s CEO encourages competitors between its report label divisions, UMG’s compensation construction should be a zero-sum recreation that ‘pitted Lamar’s label in opposition to Drake’s label.”
UMG authorized reps
“Drake makes no try to clarify how his intrusive request for 5 years’ value of particular person compensation information is conceivably related or proportional to this case, which facilities on the discharge and promotion of a single observe and music video in 2024,” UMG’s legal professionals acknowledged.
UMG additionally pushed again in opposition to Drake’s idea that Janick was incentivized to advertise Lamar over Drake as a consequence of inter-label competitors, calling it manufactured hypothesis.
“Drake manufactures the idea for such a motive out of skinny air, speculating that as a result of UMG’s CEO encourages competitors between its report label divisions, UMG’s compensation construction should be a zero-sum recreation that ‘pitted Lamar’s label in opposition to Drake’s label,’” the submitting reads.
Battle over Kendrick Lamar contract particulars intensifies
The invention dispute has additionally intensified round Drake’s calls for to see Kendrick Lamar’s full recording contract with UMG.
Drake’s authorized crew argues they want the entire, unredacted contract to show their case that UMG had the contractual authority to forestall the discharge of “Not Like Us” however selected to not train that energy.
UMG has produced parts of Lamar’s contract regarding the corporate’s rights to approve, reject or modify content material, however with in depth redactions defending commercially delicate info. Drake’s legal professionals have complained that the redactions “cowl the overwhelming majority of the 22-page settlement” and “render the settlement unreadable and incomprehensible.”
Nonetheless, UMG’s attorneys argue that Drake “can not clarify why the remainder of the contract is related” past the sections already produced. They contend that full disclosure would reveal “extremely commercially delicate info” in a case the place there’s “ongoing competitors” between Drake and Lamar.
“The ‘ongoing competitors’ between Drake and Lamar ‘requires the train of extra warning with respect to [the] commercially delicate info,’” UMG’s legal professionals wrote, citing authorized precedent.
The filings, obtained by MBW, will be learn in full right here, right here, and right here.
Background to the authorized battle
The invention battle stems from Drake’s defamation lawsuit in opposition to UMG filed in January 2025, which changed an earlier petition in opposition to UMG and Spotify that he withdrew in the identical month.
In his lawsuit, Drake alleges that UMG “determined to publish, promote, exploit and monetize allegations that it understood weren’t solely false, however harmful” in Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us,” which was launched in Might 2024 as a part of a extremely publicized rap feud between the 2 artists.
Each Drake and Lamar launch their music by UMG, with Drake signed to Republic Data and Lamar to Interscope Data. Notably, Lamar himself shouldn’t be named as a defendant within the lawsuit.
The invention course of within the case started in April after UMG unsuccessfully sought a keep of the invention course of.
UMG has beforehand dismissed Drake’s claims as “wild conspiracies” and argued that “Drake’s legal professionals can even hold in search of to ‘uncover’ proof of untamed conspiracies as to why one music that upset Drake had huge international enchantment, however there’s nothing to ‘uncover.’”Music Enterprise Worldwide
