Copyright HotNewHipHop
The tables have seemingly turned on Drake and the Owl Gang after a new lawsuit alleged that Kendrick might not have been the only rapper in the Big 3 who used fraudulent streams. In what feels like immediate karmic action, Rolling Stone reported a new lawsuit against Spotify emerged this week, alleging that they’ve allowed “mass-scale fraudulent streaming” that artificially inflated Drake’s streams. And while Drake isn’t actually a defendant, it comes on the heels of his lawsuit against UMG, which alleged that they were directly involved with botting streams for Kendrick in the wake of their feud. The lawsuit’s even more significant because it came from West Coast pioneer, former Death Row, and Snoop Dogg’s cousin, RBX, who appeared on both Doggystyle and The Chronic during his time with the iconic West Coast label. And yet, he’s managed to accumulate over a million monthly Spotify listeners. It seems like that figure largely depends on his contributions to The Chronic including “Fuck With Dre Day” and “Let Me Ride.” Below is a breakdown of RBX’s lawsuit and why Drake’s name is heavily centered in this case. Read More: Charlamagne Tha God Predicts A Sweeping Federal Investigation Will Occur Following Spotify Bot Lawsuit Breaking Down The Lawsuit The suit accuses Spotify of negligently allowing "mass-scale fraudulent streaming" that has artificially inflated Drake's streams, harming RBX and other independent artists, songwriters, and rightsholders. RBX, who boasts over a million monthly Spotify listeners, seeks damages for lost royalties estimated in the hundreds of millions. He positioned the case as a fight for industry equity rather than targeting Drake directly–he has not commented, per Billboard. The complaint spans 45 pages and details how Spotify's pro-rata royalty system distributes a fixed pool of funds based on total streams, meaning fake plays for one artist dilute payouts for all. What Does Drake Have To Do With This: Core Allegations Of Fraud & Platform Negligence Dec 1, 2021; Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA; Rapper, singer and actor Drake shakes hands with a fan during the second half of an Oklahoma City Thunder game at Paycom Center. Mandatory Credit: Alonzo Adams-USA TODAY Sports The lawsuit centers on claims that Spotify has "turned a blind eye" to billions of artificial streams for Drake's catalog from January 2022 to September 2025, during which he accumulated about 37 billion plays, solidifying his spot as Spotify's most-streamed artist with nearly 81 million monthly listeners. RBX alleges these fakes—generated via bots, VPNs, and illicit accounts—account for a "substantial percentage" of the total, with fraudsters exploiting the platform's lax detection to mimic organic engagement. "Every month, under Spotify’s watchful eye, billions of fraudulent streams are generated from fake, illegitimate, and/or illegal methods," the complaint states, arguing this boosts Spotify's ad revenue and stock value by inflating user metrics without aggressive intervention. The suit further claims Spotify profits from the chaos: Fake streams create the appearance of explosive growth, allowing more ad sales, while the company allegedly underinvests in anti-fraud tech to keep costs low. Read More: Drake Eyes Another Massive Streaming Milestone Ahead Of “ICEMAN” Release Evidence and Data Patterns Cited RBX's team submitted "voluminous information" including stream analytics showing red flags, Rolling Stone reports. Key examples include over 250,000 streams of Drake's 2024 single "No Face" rerouted via VPN from Turkey to the UK in a single day to dodge geographic filters. Other anomalies: Streams clustered in "geographic dead zones" with no residential addresses, and a tiny fraction—less than 2%—of Drake's listeners generating about 15% of his plays, which they claim is indicative of bot farms running tracks for 23 hours daily. The complaint highlights how Drake's numbers eclipse those of peers with comparable audiences, and that alone suggests orchestration, according to the suit. This data, sourced from third-party analytics (though not publicly named), underscores Spotify's alleged knowledge, even if they prohibits fraud in its terms. It should be noted that the lawsuit doesn’t claim that Drake or his team were directly involved or contributed to these fraudulent practices, just that he was allegedly a beneficiary of them. Spotify's Official Response and Counterarguments Spotify responded swiftly on November 3, 2025, via a statement: "We cannot comment on pending litigation. However, Spotify in no way benefits from the industry-wide challenge of artificial streaming." The company touted its "best-in-class systems" for fraud detection, including stream removal, royalty withholding, and penalties like account bans. To bolster its case, Spotify referenced a 2024 U.S. Department of Justice indictment of a $10 million streaming fraud ring, noting the perpetrators netted only $60,000 from Spotify as evidence of superior safeguards–far less than its competitors. Critics in the suit counter that bots evolve rapidly with AI, outpacing Spotify's tools, and that the platform's growth incentives prioritize volume over verification. Read More: Drake Becomes First Artist Ever With 120 Billion Spotify Streams Botting & Streaming Transparency The music industry's escalating alarm over botting has thrust transparency into the spotlight, with estimates from fraud detection firm Beatdapp pegging up to 10% of all streams as fake, and as a result, siphoning billions in royalties from genuine creators annually. This crisis peaked amid Drake's November 2024 lawsuit against Universal Music Group (UMG), where he accused the label of defamation and deceptive practices by aggressively promoting Kendrick Lamar's diss track "Not Like Us"—which branded Drake a pedophile—through alleged bots, paid influencers, and pay-for-play schemes to manipulate charts and streams. Though a New York federal court dismissed the suit in October 2025, ruling the claims speculative and protected as artistic expression, it ignited a fierce broader dialogue on fraudulent practices, exposing the hypocrisy when a recent class-action against Spotify alleges billions of Drake's own streams were bot-boosted. Artists and advocates now demand rigorous audits, user-centric royalties, and platform accountability to safeguard authenticity in a $28 billion streaming ecosystem.
