WEBVTT - The Drake v Kendrick lawsuit explained

0:00:00.520 --> 0:00:05.640
<v Speaker 1>Already and this is the Daily This is the Daily OS. Oh,

0:00:05.800 --> 0:00:16.159
<v Speaker 1>now it makes sense. Good morning, and welcome to the

0:00:16.200 --> 0:00:18.560
<v Speaker 1>Daily OS. It's Wednesday, the twelfth of February.

0:00:18.640 --> 0:00:19.960
<v Speaker 2>I'm Emma, I'm Zara.

0:00:20.400 --> 0:00:24.120
<v Speaker 1>From Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni to Jay Z Diddy

0:00:24.239 --> 0:00:28.520
<v Speaker 1>and Prince Harry. Celebrity lawsuits have dominated the headlines in

0:00:28.680 --> 0:00:32.599
<v Speaker 1>recent months. Another high profile case is back in the spotlight, though,

0:00:32.640 --> 0:00:37.680
<v Speaker 1>this week, after Kendrick Lamar's Super Bowl halftime performance. Lamar's

0:00:37.680 --> 0:00:40.280
<v Speaker 1>disc track not Like Us is the subject of a

0:00:40.360 --> 0:00:44.800
<v Speaker 1>defamation lawsuit filed by Drake last month. Today, we'll take

0:00:44.840 --> 0:00:47.200
<v Speaker 1>you through everything you need to know about this long

0:00:47.280 --> 0:00:51.360
<v Speaker 1>running Drake Kendrick feud and the latest developments on this lawsuit.

0:00:54.800 --> 0:00:57.240
<v Speaker 2>M This is one of those stories that we have

0:00:57.320 --> 0:01:00.640
<v Speaker 2>received a lot of messages about, asking us to break

0:01:00.640 --> 0:01:03.520
<v Speaker 2>it down, explain it, especially, as you said, in light

0:01:03.560 --> 0:01:06.399
<v Speaker 2>of the Super Bowl where everyone was talking about this

0:01:06.520 --> 0:01:11.640
<v Speaker 2>Kendrick Lamar Drake feud and subsequent lawsuit For anyone that

0:01:11.760 --> 0:01:13.479
<v Speaker 2>might not be up to date, and for all those

0:01:13.520 --> 0:01:16.600
<v Speaker 2>people that have slid into our dms. Where does this

0:01:16.680 --> 0:01:17.320
<v Speaker 2>story begin.

0:01:17.720 --> 0:01:20.840
<v Speaker 1>So it's been nearly a year since this feud or

0:01:20.880 --> 0:01:25.319
<v Speaker 1>this story really started gaining global attention. In case you

0:01:25.400 --> 0:01:29.360
<v Speaker 1>missed it, American rapper Kendrick Lamar Canadian rapper Drake real

0:01:29.440 --> 0:01:33.160
<v Speaker 1>name Aubrey Graham were engaged in this serious fight last

0:01:33.240 --> 0:01:36.000
<v Speaker 1>year that took the form of diss tracks.

0:01:36.080 --> 0:01:37.280
<v Speaker 2>So they began distrack.

0:01:37.520 --> 0:01:42.120
<v Speaker 1>A distrack is part of hip hop law of generations

0:01:42.160 --> 0:01:46.399
<v Speaker 1>gone by, where artists will have feuds maybe about where

0:01:46.400 --> 0:01:48.440
<v Speaker 1>they're from, the kind of music that they're making, and

0:01:48.480 --> 0:01:52.160
<v Speaker 1>they express those feuds in the form of song. So

0:01:52.280 --> 0:01:55.480
<v Speaker 1>Drake and Kendrick began exchanging insults through a series of

0:01:55.520 --> 0:02:00.240
<v Speaker 1>these distracks, and that's soon escalated to personal attacks. It

0:02:00.280 --> 0:02:02.680
<v Speaker 1>moved really quickly, so you could be forgiven at the

0:02:02.720 --> 0:02:04.720
<v Speaker 1>time for not quite keeping up with all these tracks.

0:02:04.840 --> 0:02:05.200
<v Speaker 2>That's me.

0:02:05.600 --> 0:02:09.560
<v Speaker 1>There were multiple songs being released honestly days apart, and

0:02:10.040 --> 0:02:13.520
<v Speaker 1>that kind of all came to a head in May,

0:02:13.960 --> 0:02:16.840
<v Speaker 1>so Kendrick dropped back to back tracks aimed at Drake.

0:02:17.240 --> 0:02:20.400
<v Speaker 1>Drake released a song called Family Matters where he alleged

0:02:20.440 --> 0:02:24.040
<v Speaker 1>that Kendrick Lamar physically abused his partner. So the lyric

0:02:24.120 --> 0:02:27.080
<v Speaker 1>in question is they hired a crisis management team to

0:02:27.160 --> 0:02:29.040
<v Speaker 1>clean up the fact that you beat on your queen.

0:02:29.200 --> 0:02:31.919
<v Speaker 1>He rapped worth lagging here that there haven't been any

0:02:32.000 --> 0:02:35.880
<v Speaker 1>other similar allegations against Kendrick made in public just in

0:02:36.000 --> 0:02:40.280
<v Speaker 1>Drake's songs, and within minutes, Lamar released the song Meet

0:02:40.280 --> 0:02:43.680
<v Speaker 1>the Grahams, where he accused Drake of employing sex offenders.

0:02:43.919 --> 0:02:46.320
<v Speaker 1>The lyrics compared Drake to form a film producer and

0:02:46.400 --> 0:02:50.120
<v Speaker 1>convicted rapist Harvey Weinstein and urged people to quote keep

0:02:50.160 --> 0:02:53.799
<v Speaker 1>their family away from him. The day after Kendrick released

0:02:53.840 --> 0:02:56.880
<v Speaker 1>Meet the Grahams, he dropped not Like Us Now. This

0:02:57.200 --> 0:03:00.639
<v Speaker 1>is the song in question. This song is the subject

0:03:00.760 --> 0:03:04.720
<v Speaker 1>of a defamation lawsuit filed by Drake last month. Now,

0:03:04.760 --> 0:03:07.920
<v Speaker 1>in terms of where this all started, why they hate

0:03:07.919 --> 0:03:10.400
<v Speaker 1>each other so much, it seems in the first place,

0:03:10.480 --> 0:03:12.680
<v Speaker 1>it might be hard to believe now that there was

0:03:12.880 --> 0:03:16.560
<v Speaker 1>a time when Drake and Kendrick Lamar might have been friends.

0:03:16.560 --> 0:03:19.720
<v Speaker 1>They featured in music together, they shared tour stages, but

0:03:19.800 --> 0:03:22.200
<v Speaker 1>that was short lived, and they've been feuding pretty much

0:03:22.280 --> 0:03:25.720
<v Speaker 1>ever since twenty thirteen. I do think it's important to

0:03:25.760 --> 0:03:28.919
<v Speaker 1>kind of acknowledge that rap is a genre of music

0:03:29.080 --> 0:03:33.120
<v Speaker 1>famous for egos and big personalities and feuds. You know,

0:03:33.240 --> 0:03:36.360
<v Speaker 1>think Big in Tupac, jay Z and Nas fifty cent

0:03:36.440 --> 0:03:38.960
<v Speaker 1>and Kanye. So this is kind of a long standing

0:03:39.000 --> 0:03:42.320
<v Speaker 1>tradition in the genre, but it has gone a little

0:03:42.320 --> 0:03:42.840
<v Speaker 1>bit further.

0:03:43.200 --> 0:03:43.280
<v Speaker 2>So.

0:03:43.440 --> 0:03:46.840
<v Speaker 1>Kendrick featured on a Big Sean song in twenty thirteen

0:03:47.080 --> 0:03:50.560
<v Speaker 1>called Control There with Me Where. On that song he

0:03:50.680 --> 0:03:53.560
<v Speaker 1>called out Drake, J Cole and a host of other rappers,

0:03:53.720 --> 0:03:56.120
<v Speaker 1>warning them quote, I got love for you all, but

0:03:56.160 --> 0:03:59.920
<v Speaker 1>I'm trying to murder you. In an interview with Billboard,

0:04:00.240 --> 0:04:04.920
<v Speaker 1>Drake dismissed Kendrick's words as an ambitious thought and basically

0:04:04.920 --> 0:04:07.000
<v Speaker 1>he said there's no way that Kendrick was kind of

0:04:07.040 --> 0:04:09.640
<v Speaker 1>ever going to succeed more than him or ever be

0:04:09.840 --> 0:04:12.560
<v Speaker 1>a better or bigger rapper than him. Now, over the

0:04:12.560 --> 0:04:16.320
<v Speaker 1>next few years, they exchanged jabs pretty harmless. It never

0:04:16.320 --> 0:04:20.000
<v Speaker 1>seemed that serious. And then in twenty twenty three, rapper

0:04:20.120 --> 0:04:24.000
<v Speaker 1>J Cole featured on a Drake song called First Person Shooter,

0:04:24.120 --> 0:04:27.280
<v Speaker 1>where he referred to himself and Drake and Kendrick as

0:04:27.400 --> 0:04:31.000
<v Speaker 1>raps big three. So this idea that J Cole, Drake

0:04:31.120 --> 0:04:33.479
<v Speaker 1>and Kenny are the three most kind of consequential or

0:04:33.520 --> 0:04:37.479
<v Speaker 1>popular rappers of their time. In March twenty twenty four,

0:04:37.640 --> 0:04:40.480
<v Speaker 1>If You're Still with Me, a hidden track with an

0:04:40.600 --> 0:04:43.640
<v Speaker 1>uncredited verse by Kendrick popped up on an album from

0:04:43.720 --> 0:04:48.240
<v Speaker 1>producer Metro Boomen and rapper Future. Kendrick rapped that there

0:04:48.400 --> 0:04:52.440
<v Speaker 1>was no Big Three, It's just Big Me. A lot

0:04:52.480 --> 0:04:54.279
<v Speaker 1>more was said on that song, but I won't bore

0:04:54.320 --> 0:04:56.680
<v Speaker 1>you with all of the detail. All you need to

0:04:56.720 --> 0:04:59.560
<v Speaker 1>know really is that that lit a fuse for Drake.

0:04:59.640 --> 0:05:03.000
<v Speaker 1>It seems j Cole released a disc track in response

0:05:03.040 --> 0:05:05.560
<v Speaker 1>to that about Kendrick, but he later described it as

0:05:05.600 --> 0:05:09.120
<v Speaker 1>a misstep, apologized took it all back. So the Big

0:05:09.160 --> 0:05:11.720
<v Speaker 1>Three became the Big two, and it seems like there

0:05:11.760 --> 0:05:14.359
<v Speaker 1>was kind of no going back for Kendrick and Drake

0:05:14.560 --> 0:05:15.360
<v Speaker 1>from that point.

0:05:15.760 --> 0:05:19.279
<v Speaker 2>Okay, so they've obviously exchanged strong words on a number

0:05:19.320 --> 0:05:23.039
<v Speaker 2>of occasions through a number of distracks. But why is

0:05:23.160 --> 0:05:24.760
<v Speaker 2>not like us the song that you said is the

0:05:24.760 --> 0:05:28.240
<v Speaker 2>subject of this defamation suit. Why is that song any

0:05:28.279 --> 0:05:30.880
<v Speaker 2>different to anything else that's happened.

0:05:30.960 --> 0:05:33.880
<v Speaker 1>Yes, so you could argue there are two reasons for

0:05:34.040 --> 0:05:36.080
<v Speaker 1>the focus being on this song, and the first is

0:05:36.200 --> 0:05:39.880
<v Speaker 1>its lyrics and the second is its popularity. We'll start

0:05:39.880 --> 0:05:43.039
<v Speaker 1>with the lyrics, which drake claims include false allegations that

0:05:43.080 --> 0:05:46.200
<v Speaker 1>he's a pedophile. So some of the lyrics include Drake,

0:05:46.279 --> 0:05:48.640
<v Speaker 1>I hear you like him young, make sure you hide

0:05:48.640 --> 0:05:51.240
<v Speaker 1>your little sister from him trying to strike a chord,

0:05:51.279 --> 0:05:55.920
<v Speaker 1>and it's probably a minor, certified lover boy, certified pedophile.

0:05:56.120 --> 0:05:58.640
<v Speaker 1>That's a lyric in reference to Drake's twenty twenty one album.

0:05:59.160 --> 0:06:01.680
<v Speaker 1>And then the popular plority of this song is relevant

0:06:01.800 --> 0:06:04.200
<v Speaker 1>to the legal action that will get too shortly.

0:06:04.000 --> 0:06:05.120
<v Speaker 2>Because that song blew up.

0:06:05.240 --> 0:06:07.880
<v Speaker 1>It absolutely blew up. It's skyrocketed to the top of

0:06:07.920 --> 0:06:11.720
<v Speaker 1>the charts. It became Spotify's most streamed American hip hop

0:06:11.760 --> 0:06:14.760
<v Speaker 1>song in a single day, and at the time of recording,

0:06:15.040 --> 0:06:16.720
<v Speaker 1>not Like Us is well on its way to one

0:06:16.720 --> 0:06:20.960
<v Speaker 1>point one billion streams on Spotify. To put that into perspective,

0:06:21.240 --> 0:06:25.520
<v Speaker 1>Kendrick is, you know, a long time popular figure in

0:06:25.680 --> 0:06:28.560
<v Speaker 1>rap music. He has twenty two Grammys to his name.

0:06:28.680 --> 0:06:31.760
<v Speaker 1>He is a Pulitzer Prize winning artist. He's been releasing

0:06:31.839 --> 0:06:34.120
<v Speaker 1>music for well over a decade, but in less than

0:06:34.160 --> 0:06:36.479
<v Speaker 1>a year, not Like Us has become one of his

0:06:36.640 --> 0:06:40.240
<v Speaker 1>most streamed songs, and in terms of its critical success,

0:06:40.520 --> 0:06:43.159
<v Speaker 1>the track won all five categories. It was nominated in

0:06:43.200 --> 0:06:46.520
<v Speaker 1>at the recent Grammy Awards, including Song of the Year.

0:06:46.720 --> 0:06:49.599
<v Speaker 2>That was a big one. Yeah, And so that song

0:06:49.760 --> 0:06:52.920
<v Speaker 2>was released in May, but the lawsuit didn't emerge until

0:06:53.160 --> 0:06:56.599
<v Speaker 2>January of the following year. What happened in between them?

0:06:57.000 --> 0:06:59.560
<v Speaker 1>So in the months between the release of not Like

0:06:59.640 --> 0:07:02.039
<v Speaker 1>Us this lawsuit, the few didn't go away. There was

0:07:02.120 --> 0:07:06.120
<v Speaker 1>plenty happening. A security guard was shot outside Drake's home

0:07:06.240 --> 0:07:09.400
<v Speaker 1>in Toronto. There were also several attempted break ins and

0:07:09.440 --> 0:07:13.240
<v Speaker 1>trespassing incidents at that house last year. And in November,

0:07:13.400 --> 0:07:17.240
<v Speaker 1>Drake filed but then withdrew, a legal claim against Universal

0:07:17.360 --> 0:07:20.480
<v Speaker 1>Music Group. Both he and Kendrick have deals with UMG

0:07:20.600 --> 0:07:24.240
<v Speaker 1>to publish their music, and that claim accused Universal of

0:07:24.320 --> 0:07:27.640
<v Speaker 1>using bots to inflate the streaming numbers of not Like Us.

0:07:27.960 --> 0:07:32.080
<v Speaker 1>Interesting the label denied those allegations and that action was dropped.

0:07:32.400 --> 0:07:34.720
<v Speaker 2>And so that brings us to this year when Drake

0:07:34.760 --> 0:07:37.200
<v Speaker 2>filed defamation action. And what do we need to know

0:07:37.240 --> 0:07:38.400
<v Speaker 2>about this lawsuit?

0:07:38.720 --> 0:07:41.520
<v Speaker 1>So Kendrick wrote and produced the song, but he is

0:07:41.640 --> 0:07:44.880
<v Speaker 1>not the one being sued. As with that previous petition,

0:07:45.040 --> 0:07:48.840
<v Speaker 1>Drake is actually suing Universal. So the Canadian rapper is

0:07:48.840 --> 0:07:51.800
<v Speaker 1>alleging that the song not Like Us suggests he is

0:07:51.800 --> 0:07:55.440
<v Speaker 1>a pedophile, which he denies, and UMG's publicity of the

0:07:55.520 --> 0:07:59.520
<v Speaker 1>song is defamatory. Specifically, Drake alleges that the song was

0:07:59.600 --> 0:08:03.320
<v Speaker 1>quote in tended to convey the specific, unmistakable and false

0:08:03.400 --> 0:08:06.520
<v Speaker 1>actual allegation that he is a criminal pedophile and to

0:08:06.560 --> 0:08:11.320
<v Speaker 1>suggest that the public should resort to vigilante justice in response. Now,

0:08:11.400 --> 0:08:14.520
<v Speaker 1>Kendrick and Drake have a deal with Universal that means

0:08:14.600 --> 0:08:17.920
<v Speaker 1>it publishes and promotes their music in exchange for a

0:08:17.960 --> 0:08:22.280
<v Speaker 1>percentage of streaming and sales revenue. So Drake alleges that

0:08:22.480 --> 0:08:26.560
<v Speaker 1>Universal publicized not Like Us as much as possible for

0:08:26.720 --> 0:08:31.360
<v Speaker 1>profit to profit off those big streaming numbers. Legal documents

0:08:31.400 --> 0:08:34.160
<v Speaker 1>say this lawsuit is not about the artist who created

0:08:34.160 --> 0:08:38.520
<v Speaker 1>the song. It's instead entirely about Universal Music Group, which

0:08:38.559 --> 0:08:42.400
<v Speaker 1>decided to quote, publish, promote, exploit, and monetize allegations that

0:08:42.440 --> 0:08:46.800
<v Speaker 1>it understood were not only false but dangerous. Drake alleges

0:08:46.920 --> 0:08:49.679
<v Speaker 1>UMG worked to make the song ubiquitous so that it's

0:08:49.720 --> 0:08:51.760
<v Speaker 1>not just fans of rap who now believe he is

0:08:51.800 --> 0:08:55.040
<v Speaker 1>a quote certified pedophile, but also that the broader kind

0:08:55.040 --> 0:08:58.520
<v Speaker 1>of community, that broad pop culture, the new cycle audiences

0:08:58.559 --> 0:09:02.199
<v Speaker 1>around the world that we're talking about it. And Drake

0:09:02.240 --> 0:09:05.720
<v Speaker 1>has also alleged that Universal organized for Kendrick Lamar to

0:09:05.760 --> 0:09:09.000
<v Speaker 1>perform the song at this week's Super Bowl halftime show.

0:09:09.200 --> 0:09:11.560
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. I mean that's the big talking point here, that

0:09:12.040 --> 0:09:15.760
<v Speaker 2>all eyes were on Kendrick Lamar as he performed at

0:09:15.800 --> 0:09:18.199
<v Speaker 2>the halftime show. We were all watching in the office

0:09:18.200 --> 0:09:19.880
<v Speaker 2>trying to figure out if he was going to perform this,

0:09:20.000 --> 0:09:21.679
<v Speaker 2>if he was going to be allowed to perform it.

0:09:22.160 --> 0:09:25.280
<v Speaker 2>He ultimately did perform the song. Talk me through what happened.

0:09:25.480 --> 0:09:27.880
<v Speaker 1>Yes, So, as you mentioned, Zara, there was a lot

0:09:27.920 --> 0:09:30.599
<v Speaker 1>of speculation, will he won't here? Are we going to

0:09:30.679 --> 0:09:33.679
<v Speaker 1>hear this song? Kendrick did give us a little teaser

0:09:33.760 --> 0:09:36.400
<v Speaker 1>early in the performance and he said.

0:09:36.240 --> 0:09:39.199
<v Speaker 2>This, I want to perform their favorite song. But you

0:09:39.240 --> 0:09:40.479
<v Speaker 2>know they loved a super.

0:09:44.480 --> 0:09:47.560
<v Speaker 1>Fans were then in overdrive wondering what that meant. But

0:09:47.640 --> 0:09:50.480
<v Speaker 1>he did eventually give them what they wanted and performed

0:09:50.559 --> 0:09:53.840
<v Speaker 1>part of the track, including some of the controversial lyrics,

0:09:54.200 --> 0:09:56.880
<v Speaker 1>but he stopped short of using the word pedophile.

0:09:58.360 --> 0:10:01.160
<v Speaker 2>I hear you like make sure you had your bills

0:10:01.200 --> 0:10:06.600
<v Speaker 2>system from sort of fun number points Fun, you tie

0:10:06.600 --> 0:10:11.839
<v Speaker 2>your trying to strike report, and I'm curious to hear

0:10:11.880 --> 0:10:15.160
<v Speaker 2>what Universal has said about this. I mean, in the

0:10:15.240 --> 0:10:18.360
<v Speaker 2>lawsuit that you just spread out, Drake is very clearly

0:10:18.400 --> 0:10:21.240
<v Speaker 2>calling out their role, or at least what he alleged

0:10:21.280 --> 0:10:24.000
<v Speaker 2>ess to be their role in all of this. What

0:10:24.120 --> 0:10:25.200
<v Speaker 2>has their response been.

0:10:25.440 --> 0:10:28.480
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it's an interesting one because, as we've discussed, you know,

0:10:28.559 --> 0:10:31.600
<v Speaker 1>this is a music label that publishes for both artists

0:10:31.720 --> 0:10:35.160
<v Speaker 1>in question here, so tricky and unlike anything I've really

0:10:35.200 --> 0:10:38.560
<v Speaker 1>seen in the public eye. UMG said that it plans

0:10:38.600 --> 0:10:42.200
<v Speaker 1>to fight the lawsuit. It says, quote, Drake has intentionally

0:10:42.240 --> 0:10:47.400
<v Speaker 1>and successfully used Universal to engage in conventionally outrageous back

0:10:47.440 --> 0:10:51.040
<v Speaker 1>and forth rap battles to express his feelings about other artists.

0:10:51.440 --> 0:10:54.000
<v Speaker 1>It said, he now seeks to weaponize the legal process

0:10:54.080 --> 0:10:57.920
<v Speaker 1>to silence an artist's creative expression and to seek damages

0:10:57.960 --> 0:11:00.440
<v Speaker 1>from the label for distributing that artist music.

0:11:00.720 --> 0:11:04.360
<v Speaker 2>Has Drake done other dis tracks about other artists before.

0:11:04.200 --> 0:11:07.880
<v Speaker 1>Yes, Drake is well known throughout his many many years

0:11:08.040 --> 0:11:10.920
<v Speaker 1>of not being shy when it comes to distracks. There

0:11:10.920 --> 0:11:13.640
<v Speaker 1>have been so many artists in the firing line. Even

0:11:13.679 --> 0:11:18.160
<v Speaker 1>some of these distracts about Kendrick have also criticized other artists,

0:11:18.200 --> 0:11:22.360
<v Speaker 1>including The Weekend, so it's not unusual for him as

0:11:22.400 --> 0:11:25.719
<v Speaker 1>an artist to use that form of expression. Universal has

0:11:25.760 --> 0:11:28.640
<v Speaker 1>also said, not only are these claims untrue, but the

0:11:28.679 --> 0:11:31.360
<v Speaker 1>notion that we would seek to harm the reputation of

0:11:31.360 --> 0:11:34.920
<v Speaker 1>any artist, let alone Drake, is illogical. It noted the

0:11:35.000 --> 0:11:38.400
<v Speaker 1>label has invested massively to use its words in Drake,

0:11:38.800 --> 0:11:43.280
<v Speaker 1>helping him quote achieve historic commercial and personal financial success.

0:11:43.679 --> 0:11:46.319
<v Speaker 1>We have not and do not, engage in defamation against

0:11:46.440 --> 0:11:50.840
<v Speaker 1>any individual, the statement concluded. Now, coincidentally, Drake is here

0:11:50.880 --> 0:11:52.160
<v Speaker 1>in Australia right now.

0:11:52.600 --> 0:11:54.280
<v Speaker 2>Is he just thought he'd be on a different time

0:11:54.360 --> 0:11:56.559
<v Speaker 2>zone to watch the super Bols? Yeah, exactly.

0:11:56.679 --> 0:11:59.600
<v Speaker 1>So, I mean he's away from the chaos in the

0:11:59.720 --> 0:12:02.160
<v Speaker 1>US and the interest in him there. But I'm sure

0:12:02.200 --> 0:12:04.800
<v Speaker 1>local fans are waiting to see what he might have

0:12:04.880 --> 0:12:07.080
<v Speaker 1>to say. He's doing a huge run of stadium shows

0:12:07.160 --> 0:12:10.320
<v Speaker 1>over the next four weeks, so there will be plenty

0:12:10.360 --> 0:12:13.680
<v Speaker 1>of local interest and local attention to see what he

0:12:13.760 --> 0:12:15.439
<v Speaker 1>does next and if this escalates.

0:12:15.679 --> 0:12:19.560
<v Speaker 2>Look, it's a really interesting story. And again, you know celebrities,

0:12:19.720 --> 0:12:23.320
<v Speaker 2>that's not really our arena, but I think how this

0:12:23.360 --> 0:12:25.760
<v Speaker 2>sort of story interacts with the legal system and the

0:12:25.840 --> 0:12:28.800
<v Speaker 2>ramifications and the precedent that might be set. That is

0:12:28.840 --> 0:12:32.000
<v Speaker 2>really what makes this so newsworthy. And you know everyone

0:12:32.080 --> 0:12:34.800
<v Speaker 2>is talking about and I now better understand it. So

0:12:34.800 --> 0:12:35.599
<v Speaker 2>thanks for explaining that.

0:12:35.679 --> 0:12:38.440
<v Speaker 1>Aam a pleasure. Thank you, and thanks so much for

0:12:38.520 --> 0:12:40.559
<v Speaker 1>listening to this episode of The Daily Hours. If you

0:12:40.640 --> 0:12:42.600
<v Speaker 1>learned something, feel free to share it with a friend.

0:12:42.760 --> 0:12:45.760
<v Speaker 1>Don't forget to follow or subscribe wherever you are listening

0:12:45.880 --> 0:12:48.720
<v Speaker 1>to the podcast or if you're watching us over on YouTube.

0:12:48.840 --> 0:12:51.200
<v Speaker 1>We'll be back a little later on today with your

0:12:51.280 --> 0:12:55.000
<v Speaker 1>evening headlines, but until then, have a good one.

0:12:58.120 --> 0:13:00.440
<v Speaker 2>My name is Lily Madden and I'm a proud Arunda

0:13:00.640 --> 0:13:05.439
<v Speaker 2>Banjelung Kalkadin woman from Gadighl Country. The Daily oz acknowledges

0:13:05.520 --> 0:13:07.679
<v Speaker 2>that this podcast is recorded on the lands of the

0:13:07.720 --> 0:13:11.320
<v Speaker 2>Gadighl people and pays respect to all Aboriginal and torrest

0:13:11.360 --> 0:13:14.200
<v Speaker 2>Rate island and nations. We pay our respects to the

0:13:14.200 --> 0:13:17.000
<v Speaker 2>first peoples of these countries, both past and present.