On Valentine’s Day, Drake collaborated with Ovo Signee and frequent partner Partynextdoor to release the cooperative album Some sexy songs 4 uA 21-track project that marks his first release since the three-track project 100 appearances Last August.
More significant, it’s his first release since he brought a lawsuit against his record label, Universal Music Group (UMG), on January 15 for defamation of the release of Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us” targeted the Canadian rapper who became Released by UMG’s InterScope Records. In the trial, lawyers for Drake claimed that “Umg intentionally tried to transform Drake into a pariah, a target of harassment or worse,” by pushing to a “false and malicious tale” that the Star -Rapper was a “certified pedophile “As Lamar rapped on the field. .
It raises the question: How is Drake is able to release an album while actively suing the record label he is signed?
First, the logistics: The new album was released jointly through Ovo Sound, which Partynextdoor is signed, which is distributed by Santa Anna, a company under Sony Music Group’s Alamo Records umbrella; And Ovo, who is Drake’s vehicle through UMG’s Republic records. They are co-image in that way and in the order of digital service providers such as Spotify and Apple Music. These types of common releases are relatively common; Think Future and Metro Boomins Back-to-Back We don’t trust you Albums last year, released jointly via Future’s Label Epic Records (also a Sony label) and Metro’s Label Republic Records. (Random, We don’t trust you Contained the song “Like That” with Lamar, the track that started the Drake-KNOKTRICK-ox meat in earnest.) Another, more current, example is Lady Gaga-Bruno Mars collaboration “Die with a Smile”, currently sitting on no .
This means that UMG would have had to legally clear Drake’s appearance on the album, a result that a handful of attorneys consulted by Billboard Say would not necessarily be affected by any ongoing litigation. “To sue UMG should not prevent him from working legally with them,” says a lawyer. “As for their desire to be in a contractual relationship with him while he is litigation against them, it is another story.” Adds someone else who agreed that it would not affect his ability to release an album: “Whether UMG decides to properly finance and support a release that Drake wants to do, while Drake plaintiffs UMG is another question. “
A spokesman for UMG did not immediately respond to a request for comment. In his response to the original trial last month, the company wrote: “We have invested massively in [Drake’s] Music and our employees around the world have worked tirelessly for many years to help him achieve historically commercial and personal financial success. … Throughout his career, Drake has intentionally and successfully used UMG to distribute his music and poetry to engage in conventionally scandalous back and forth ‘rap matches’ to express his feelings over other artists. He is now seeking to weapon the legal process to dampen an artist’s creative expression and to seek compensation from UMG to distribute the artist’s music. “
An artist who sues their record label is not an unheard of occurrence; This has happened several times over the years, often over royalty payments or other contractual disputes. However, suing their own record label for defamation of a dissence trace is unprecedented; Given the mutually advantageous financial conditions involved in an artist and an album’s commercial success, it would be the reason why UMG would not aim to hurt one of their superstar artists significantly. But it is a decision for the courts to make.
Further reporting from Elias Leight.