Jim Jones Defends Drake’s UMG Defamation Lawsuit: 'This Some James Bond Sh*t He’s Doing'

Jim Jones argues that people are misunderstanding the intentions behind Drake’s much-debated defamation lawsuit against UMG.

As previously reported, the lawsuit in question does indeed focus on Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us,” although Kendrick himself is not accused of wrongdoing. More specifically, Drake’s legal team words it like this: “This lawsuit is not about the artist who created ‘Not Like Us.’ It is, instead, entirely about UMG, the music company that decided to publish, promote, exploit, and monetize allegations that it understood were not only false, but dangerous.”

Asked about the lawsuit during a recent appearance on DMAL’s BNF podcast, Jones, whose new single “JOMO” is set to drop later this month, argued that Drake is operating in “a different realm.” Per Jones, people are “thinking about this shit wrong.” As he sees it, Drake stands to potentially see “a billion-dollar again” while in the middle of a beef.

“He’s not personally suing against Kendrick Lamar, which everybody seems to think that this lawsuit is about,” Jones said around 34 minutes into the interview. “He didn’t sue Kendrick Lamar. He sued UMG, which is the biggest company that has the biggest bag, n***a. You think I ain’t gon’ sue Amazon if I get a chance to? We suing everybody, n***a. Any one of them companies I get a chance to, playing at that level, to sue for billions? I’m going for it.”

Jones went on to point out that he would feel differently if Drake were indeed directly suing Kendrick, which, to be clear, is not what’s happening here. The Dipset alum also compared the scope of the case to Tracy Morgan’s legal victory against Walmart over negligence in a six-car crash in 2014.

“So how the fuck we not gon’ be happy about somebody who gets a bag from one of the biggest companies that’s been raping everybody anyway?” Jones asked, adding that he believes people would be applauding the move if it instead involved a “coalition” of multiple artists.

Drake, in Jones’ opinion, is “smart enough to use his turbulence” to go after UMG, adding that “none of us would ever be in them rooms anyway.” To illustrate his point, which hinged on criticisms centered on the role the beef itself plays in the lawsuit, Jones brought in mentions of vegetables and fruit.

“Y’all associating motherfuckin’ brussels sprouts with apples,” he said. “It’s two totally different things.”

Later, Jones likened Drake’s legal moves to the antics of a fictional spy, like so: “It’s a dangerous thing he’s doing. This some James Bond shit he’s doing.” Still, Jones made clear, he’s not personally invested in the outcome of the UMG lawsuit.

“I don’t care,” he said. “It’s none of my business.”

In a statement issued to Complex following news of Drake's lawsuit last week, a UMG spokesperson called the claims at the core of the complaint “untrue,” pointing to the For All the Dogs artist’s long history with UMG.

“Throughout his career, Drake has intentionally and successfully used UMG to distribute his music and poetry to engage in conventionally outrageous back-and-forth ‘rap battles’ to express his feelings about other artists,” the spokesperson said in an email. “He now seeks to weaponize the legal process to silence an artist’s creative expression and to seek damages from UMG for distributing that artist’s music.”