\n<\/p>\n
Drake<\/a>\u2018s legal woes have taken yet another twist as the 6 God has been named in a new class action lawsuit accusing Spotify of \u201cturning a blind-eye\u201d to \u201cmass-scale fraudulent streaming.\u201d<\/p>\n The lawsuit, filed by rapper RBX<\/a> \u2014 a cousin of Snoop Dogg<\/a> who is best known for his collaborations with Dr. Dre<\/a> and Eminem<\/a> \u2014 cites Drake as the main beneficiary of this alleged misconduct, claiming a \u201csubstantial\u201d amount of his record 122 billion Spotify streams<\/a> have come through illegal methods such as bots.<\/p>\n Such mass scale streaming fraud \u201ccauses massive financial harm to legitimate artists, songwriters, producers, and other rightsholders,\u201d argues the suit, which was obtained by Rolling Stone<\/a><\/em>.<\/p>\n Though Drake is named in the lawsuit, he is not listed as a defandant. Only Spotify is accused of wrongdoing.<\/p>\n In the complaint, RBX points to \u201cvoluminous information\u201d which he says proves that a significant percentage of Drizzy\u2019s streams were \u201cinauthentic and appeared to be the work of a sprawling network of Bot Accounts.\u201d<\/p>\n Between January 2022 and September 2025, the suit claims, an examination of the Canadian hitmaker\u2019s streams revealed \u201cabnormal VPN usage\u201d had obscured the location of these bot accounts.<\/p>\n RBX alleges that over a four-day period in 2024, over 250,000 streams of Drake\u2019s song \u201cNo Face\u201d originated in Turkey \u201cbut were falsely geomapped through the coordinated use of VPNs to the United Kingdom in [an] attempt to obscure their origins.\u201d<\/p>\n The \u201cRemember Me?\u201d rapper even claims that \u201ca large percentage\u201d of accounts streamed Drake\u2019s music from \u201careas whose population could not support\u201d such a large volume of streams, and that some streams originated in areas with \u201czero residential addresses.\u201d<\/p>\n A spokesperson for Spotify refuted the allegations, saying in a statement: \u201cWe cannot comment on pending litigation. However, Spotify in no way benefits from the industry-wide challenge of artificial streaming.<\/p>\n \u201cWe heavily invest in always-improving, best-in-class systems to combat it and safeguard artist payouts with strong protections like removing fake streams, withholding royalties, and charging penalties.\u201d<\/p>\n The statement continued: \u201cOur systems are working: In a case from last year, one bad actor was indicted for stealing $10 million from streaming services, only $60,000 of which came from Spotify, proving how effective we are at limiting the impact of artificial streaming on our platform.\u201d<\/p>\n Drake himself has yet to comment on the lawsuit.<\/p>\n The bombshell suit comes shortly after the OVO Sound boss saw his own lawsuit against Universal Music Group<\/a>, which contained similar allegations of streaming fraud, get dismissed.<\/p>\n A federal New York judge tossed out the high-profile complaint after ruling that Kendrick Lamar\u2019s hit diss song \u201cNot Like Us\u201d did not defame Drake.<\/p>\n The Toronto native has since filed a notice of appeal, signalling his intent to dispute the decision.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n\n<\/blockquote>\n