IheartMedia Reaches Settlement with Drake
IheartMedia settled a court dispute with Drake regarding allegations that the radio network received Payola from Universal Music Group (UMG) to play Kendrick Lamar’s track, Not Like We.
During the hearing on Thursday (February 27), at the district court of Bexar in San Antonio, Texas, where the IheartMedia headquarters is located, Drake’s legal team stated that the rapper and the radio network “reached a friendly resolution of the dispute to satisfy both sides.”
No additional details were provided in the judicial file.
In a statement to MBW, Drake’s legal team expressed: “We are pleased that the parties were able to achieve a settlement, satisfactory for both sides, and we will not be commenting further on this issue.”
“In exchange for documents that showed that Iheart did nothing wrong, Drake agreed to abandon his petition. No payments were made – one of us.”
Iheart
The legal action against UMG will remain active in the Texas district court.
Details of the Legal Dispute
Drake filed a petition in November last year, claiming that UMG “designed, financed, and then fulfilled the plan” to turn Lamar’s Not Like We into a viral mega-hit, intending to leverage the adverse situation for Drake to generate consumer hysteria and, ultimately, significant profits.
The petition cited an unnamed “internal source” who allegedly claimed that UMG “made hidden payments to various platforms, including radio stations, to play and promote Not Like We without disclosing these payments to listeners.” This practice, known as Payola, is prohibited by the 1934 Communications Act.
UMG is the parent company of both Republic Records, which distributes Drake’s music, and Interscope, which distributes Kendrick Lamar’s music.
The petition also named iHeartMedia as a respondent. Drake’s legal team admitted in court documents that they “could not confirm whether there were any iHeartRadio stations among those paid in the (alleged) UMG payment scheme,” but they suspected IheartMedia’s involvement due to it being the “number one audio company” in the United States.
The petition is not a lawsuit, but a request for “pre-trial discovery” under Texas civil procedure rules. Drake’s lawyers aimed to depose UMG and IheartMedia executives ahead of a potential trial.
In January, UMG filed a motion to dismiss Drake’s petition, describing it as an “obvious attempt to pressure (UMG and others) to limit the distribution of Not Like We.”
UMG lawyers referenced the Texas Citizens Participation Act, designed to prevent lawsuits that are “intended to intimidate and punish individuals for exercising their First Amendment rights,” as noted in UMG’s application.
Implications of the Settlement
The settlement between iHeartMedia and Drake comes amid an investigation by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) into allegations unrelated to the current dispute.
FCC Chair Brendan Carr notified iHeartMedia last week that the agency is initiating enforcement actions against the company over claims that the radio network requested artists to perform without payment or to accept lower payments at iHeart music festivals in exchange for “more favorable airplay.” Specific accusations include the IHeart Country Music Festival, scheduled to take place in Austin, Texas, in May of this year.
Lamar’s diss track, Not Like We, became one of the biggest hits of 2024, amassing over 1.2 billion streams on Spotify since its release in May 2024.
Lamar performed the track during a Super Bowl halftime show, closely watched by industry insiders, especially given the ongoing legal situation regarding Drake.
In addition to the legal proceedings in Texas, Drake also filed a defamation lawsuit against UMG in federal court in New York, accusing the music company of promoting a “false and malicious narrative” about him through text content, single art, and music videos related to Not Like We.
Drake claims that the release and marketing of the record led to “physical threats (to his) security” and “online harassment,” resulting in concerns for the safety of himself, his family, and friends.
The lawsuit does not name Lamar as a defendant since Drake’s legal team asserts that the case is “entirely about UMG, the music company that chose to publish, promote, and profit from allegations that they deemed not only false but also dangerous.”
Representatives from UMG stated to MBW in January: “These claims are not only unfounded but the idea that we would seek to harm any artist’s reputation – let alone Drake’s – is illogical.”
They added: “We have invested significantly in his music, and our teams worldwide have worked tirelessly to help him achieve historical commercial and personal success.”
“Throughout his career, Drake has skillfully and deliberately leveraged UMG to disseminate his music and art, often using provocative ‘rap bites’ to articulate his views on other artists.”
“Now he seeks to weaponize the legal system to stifle artistic expression and to seek damages from UMG for the promotion of this artist’s music.”
“We do not condone slander against anyone. Nonetheless, we will robustly defend this case to safeguard our team and our reputation, as well as protect any artist who may be unjustly targeted in frivolous lawsuits simply for their creative output.”
Drake settles legal dispute with iHeartMedia over Kendrick Lamar’s ‘Not Like Us’
