Drake's record label are seeking to have his lawsuit against them dismissed, arguing he "encouraged" his feud with Kendrick Lamar.

The Canadian rapper sued Universal Music Group (UMG) for releasing and promoting Lamar's diss track “Not Like Us” but in their response to the defamation case, they argued that the 38-year-old star "lost a rap battle that he provoked" and "sued his own record label in a misguided attempt to salve his wounds."

In documents obtained by “People” magazine, UMG claimed that although “Not Like Us" features hyperbolic insults, including referring to Drake and his friends as "certified paedophiles", the “God's Plan” hitmaker had used their platform to "promote tracks levelling similarly incendiary attacks" on his rival.

The filing added: “Drake encouraged the feud."

"For example, when he felt that Lamar was taking too long to respond, Drake released a second recording in which he goaded Lamar to continue the public rap battle. Lamar did just that and collectively Drake and Lamar released a total of nine tracks taking aim at each other."

The motion notes Drake was "pleased" to see UMG promote tracks that accused Lamar of engaging in domestic abuse and "that one of Lamar’s business partners and managers is the true father of Lamar’s son."

The filing noted: "But now, after losing the rap battle, Drake claims that ‘Not Like Us’ is defamatory. It is not."

The response also criticised Drake's claim “Not Like Us” constitutes "second-degree harassment" and promoting the song goes against general business law in New York.

The document stated: "Less than three years ago, Drake himself signed a public petition criticising 'the trend of prosecutors using artists’ creative expression against them' by treating rap lyrics as literal fact. As Drake recognised, when it comes to rap, '[t]he final work is a product of the artist’s vision and imagination'.

"Drake was right then and is wrong now. The complaint’s unjustified claims against UMG are no more than Drake’s attempt to save face for his unsuccessful rap battle with Lamar. The court should grant UMG’s motion and dismiss the Complaint with prejudice."

Drake's attorney, Michael J. Gottlieb, accused UMG of trying to use a "desperate ploy" to "avoid accountability.

He told “People” magazine: “UMG wants to pretend that this is about a rap battle in order to distract its shareholders, artists and the public from a simple truth: a greedy company is finally being held responsible for profiting from dangerous misinformation that has already resulted in multiple acts of violence.

"This motion is a desperate ploy by UMG to avoid accountability, but we have every confidence that this case will proceed and continue to uncover UMG’s long history of endangering, abusing and taking advantage of its artists.”