Spotify has formally fired again at claims made by Drake in a authorized submitting final month that Kendrick Lamar’s Not Like Us was “artificially inflated”.
Final month, Drake, through his firm Frozen Moments LLC, accused Common Music Group and Spotify of artificially inflating streaming numbers for Kendrick Lamar’s mega-hit Not Like Us – a diss monitor about Drake.
Drake’s allegations have been made in a authorized petition filed in New York, during which attorneys for the artist’s firm claimed that UMG used “bots” and different strategies to artificially increase numbers for Lamar’s Not Like Us.
Drake’s petition, which you’ll be able to learn in full right here, alleged that UMG “launched a marketing campaign to govern and saturate the streaming companies and airwaves with a music, Not Like Us, with the intention to make that music go viral, together with by utilizing ‘bots’ and pay-to-play agreements.”
The petition additionally claimed that “UMG charged Spotify licensing charges 30 % decrease than its common licensing charges for Not Like Us in alternate for Spotify affirmatively recommending the Music to customers who’re looking for different unrelated songs and artists.”
It continues to allege: “UMG nor Spotify disclosed that Spotify had obtained compensation of any variety in alternate for recommending the Music.”
In response to Drake’s allegations a few 30% decrease fee in alternate for suggestions, a Spotify spokesperson advised MBW on Friday (December 20): “Spotify has no financial incentive for customers to stream Not Like Us over any of Drake’s tracks.”
SPOT’s spokesperson added: “Solely one in every of Spotify for Artists’ instruments, Marquee, was bought on behalf of the music, for €500 to advertise the monitor in France. Marquee is a visible advert that’s disclosed to customers as a Sponsored Advice.”
A spokesperson for Common Music Group advised MBW final month: “The suggestion that UMG would do something to undermine any of its artists is offensive and unfaithful. We make use of the very best moral practices in our advertising and marketing and promotional campaigns.
“No quantity of contrived and absurd authorized arguments on this pre-action submission can masks the truth that followers select the music they wish to hear.”
Spotify has additionally formally filed opposition papers in response to Drake’s petition, together with an Opposition Temporary and an affirmation in help of the transient, each of which have been obtained by MBW. Within the former submitting, attorneys for SPOT argue that Drake’s petition “must be denied”.
Throughout the affirmation filed in help of the Opposition Temporary, made by David Kaefer, VP, Head of Music and Audiobooks Enterprise at Spotify USA, the exec argues that “opposite to the allegations” made in Drake’s petition, through Frozen Moments LLC, “UMG and Spotify have by no means had any association during which UMG ‘charged Spotify licensing charges 30 % decrease than its common licensing charges for Not Like Us in alternate for Spotify affirmatively recommending [Not Like Us]”, together with “to customers who’re looking for different songs and artists.”
Kaefer’s affirmation additionally famous that Drake’s petition claimed “that an unidentified particular person reported on a podcast that he used bots to attain 30,000,000 streams on Spotify within the first days of the discharge of Not Like Us,” however recommended that Spotify “discovered no proof to substantiate this declare”.
Elsewhere within the affirmation, which you’ll be able to learn in full right here, Kaefer notes that “Spotify invests closely in automated and guide opinions to forestall, detect, and mitigate the influence of synthetic streaming on our platform”.
The assertion continues: “Once we determine tried stream manipulation, we take motion which will embody eradicating streaming numbers, withholding royalties and charging penalty charges. Confirmed and suspected synthetic streams are additionally faraway from our chart calculations. This helps us to guard royalty payouts for trustworthy, hardworking artists.”
In the meantime, throughout the opposition transient, obtained by MBW and which you’ll be able to learn in full right here, attorneys for Spotify famous that Drake’s petition “speculates that UMG artificially inflated the recognition of the monitor by means of plenty of avenues, together with by utilizing ‘bots’ and ‘pay-to-play’ agreements, paying social media influencers to advertise the music, and taking steps to hide its scheme by allegedly terminating workers related to Drake”.
The transient argues, nonetheless, that “below cowl of the far-fetched rivalry that this provides rise to a civil RICO declare, Petitioner on this continuing seeks to invoke the extraordinary treatment of pre-action discovery”.
The transient provides: “As to Spotify — a stranger to this fracas — the Petition units forth a single allegation, on data and perception, that Spotify agreed with UMG to a reduced royalty fee for Not Like Us in alternate for “recommending [it] to customers who’re looking for different unrelated songs and artists.”
“On this foundation, Petitioner seeks pre-action discovery of paperwork adequate to point out any such settlement and the monetary advantages allegedly obtained. As set forth within the accompanying affirmation, the predicate of Petitioner’s complete request for discovery from Spotify is fake: there is no such thing as a such settlement. In any occasion, nonetheless, the Petition is legally poor and must be denied.”
Each Drake and Lamar launch their information through UMG and its Republic Information and Interscope, respectively.
Not Like Us (Interscope), recorded by Lamar as a part of a bitter rap feud with Drake, was launched on Could 4 as a part of a collection of three diss tracks, all launched inside a number of days of one another (the opposite tracks are Euphoria and Meet The Grahams).
Drake’s attorneys additionally filed a second authorized petition in opposition to UMG final month, this time in Texas.
Within the second submitting, obtained by MBW and which you’ll be able to learn in full right here, attorneys on behalf of Drake declare that “UMG designed, financed after which executed a plan” to show Not Like Us “right into a viral mega-hit with the intent of utilizing the spectacle of hurt to Drake and his companies to drive client hysteria and, after all, large revenues”.
The submitting provides: “That plan succeeded, doubtless past UMG’s wildest expectations.”Music Enterprise Worldwide
