Spotify has been called to be excused from the case, freeing itself from the “burden” of pre-action discovery, according to the filing. In response, Drake’s legal representatives at Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP commented that Spotify’s efforts to distance themselves from Universal Music Group’s (UMG) alleged manipulative tactics to artificially boost streaming numbers for another artist are not unexpected. The statement further emphasized that if Spotify and UMG have nothing to hide, they should have no issue complying with the basic discovery request.
UMG had previously refuted Drake’s accusations, stating, “The suggestion that UMG would do anything to undermine any of its artists is offensive and untrue.” They asserted their commitment to ethical practices in marketing and promotion, emphasizing that fans make their own choices in music consumption. Drake’s legal petitions in New York and Texas accused UMG of promoting another artist’s diss track to the detriment of Drake and his ventures.
The New York filing claimed that UMG provided Spotify with discounted licensing rates for the song “Not Like Us” in exchange for Spotify promoting it to users searching for unrelated content. Spotify contested Drake’s claims in a recent filing, pointing out Drake’s continued popularity on the platform. However, “Not Like Us” ranked high in streams in the U.S., indicating its popularity.
Spotify’s vice president addressed Drake’s claim of artificial streaming numbers, asserting that Spotify invests in measures to prevent and address such anomalies. They highlighted their commitment to fair payouts for genuine streams and their actions against artificial stream manipulation on the platform.
