After settling a legal dispute with iHeartMedia over Kendrick Lamar‘s “Not Like Us,” Drake is moving for discovery on multiple fronts from Universal Music Group, which he alleges made illegal payments to the radio company to boost airplay for the diss track.
A federal judge on Tuesday denied UMG’s bid to pause discovery in a defamation lawsuit accusing it of launching a campaign to create a viral hit out of the song. The order was issued a day after Drake moved for permission in Texas state court to depose a UMG representative and the production of certain documents relating to whether the label was actually a clearinghouse for promoting the track or actively schemed to promote it by covertly paying radio stations.
Drake’s bid for discovery follows his settlement with iHeartMedia last week to resolve a petition to take the depositions of executives at the company. Terms weren’t disclosed, though a monetary payment wasn’t involved.
“In exchange for documents that showed iHeart did nothing wrong, Drake agreed to drop his petition,” a company spokesperson said in a statement.
Drake (Republic Records), who declined to comment, and Lamar (Interscope Records) are represented by different divisions of UMG. In a lawsuit filed earlier this year in New York federal court, the Toronto rapper claimed that UMG, which holds exclusive control over licensing of “Not Like Us,” spread defamatory allegations that he’s a pedophile by making secret payments and offering reduced licensing rates to third parties to promote the song, among other things.
“According to confidential sources recently made known to Drake, certain UMG labels have engaged in pay-for-play arrangements with radio and streaming services to boost the popularity of specific songs, and used bots to artificially inflate streaming numbers,” wrote Michael Gottlieb, a lawyer for Drake, in the complaint.
In Texas state court, UMG moved to dismiss Drake’s petition under the Texas Citizens Participation Act, which provides for the early dismissal of legal actions intended to chill free speech. It said that its promotion of the song is protected activity under the First Amendment.
Citing the same law, Drake argues that he’s entitled to discovery to test whether UMG is actually covered by the TCPA. This includes the deposition of a UMG representative who will be asked about the company’s promotion strategy for “Not Like Us,” the terms of any deals the label had with iHeartMedia and streaming services, promotional agreement with influencers and financial records showing revenue earned from the song, among other things.
“Without this discovery, Drake cannot fairly test or refute the factual basis for UMG’s claims that, for example, it was acting merely as a ‘clearinghouse’ in promoting the song, or that it was not doing so in its ‘capacity as a seller’ of goods or services,” writes John Zavitsanos, another lawyer for the singer, in the motion.
On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Jeannette Vargas also turned down UMG’s motion to stay discovery. The label had argued that the case shouldn’t proceed until the court considers its bid to dismiss the lawsuit.
And in a move that could support Drake’s claims against iHeartMedia, the Federal Communications Commission last week said it was looking into whether the company is compelling artists to perform at its upcoming country music festival for free or reduced pay in exchange for more favorable airplay, which could violate government rules requiring broadcasters to disclose payments for airing certain programming.
In his lawsuit against UMG, Drake said that UMG violated so-called “payola” rules by making illegal payments to radio statements to promote “Not Like Us” without disclosing it to listeners.
Read the full article here
