DaBaby performing in Atlanta, Dec. 2021.
Paras Griffin/Getty ImagesA battery case against DaBaby in Las Vegas has been dismissed, according to online court records.
The case was dismissed with prejudice — meaning it can’t be brought again — on Dec. 1. The charge stemmed from a Nov. 2020 incident during which DaBaby (real name Jonathan Kirk) allegedly hit a Las Vegas driver during a ride. Along with the dismissal of the charges, Kirk was ordered to pay $7,500 in restitution to his accuser, Timothy Cobb.
Lawyers for Kirk, David Chesnoff and Richard Schonfeld, said in a statement, “Mr. Kirk denied the allegations and came to court prepared to fight the case at trial. In court, the case was dismissed with prejudice.”
Kirk has faced several legal issues in the past, most notably a 2018 incident where he fatally shot a 19-year-old man in a North Carolina Walmart. Kirk claimed he was acting in self-defense, and he was ultimately not charged in the man’s death; he was, however, found guilty of a misdemeanor weapons charge.
In 2020, Kirk was arrested and questioned over an alleged robbery in Miami after an altercation with promoters at a venue where he was set to perform. The promoters had reportedly promised Kirk $30,000 for the appearance, but he was allegedly only given $20,000; a verbal and physical altercation erupted over the discrepancy with Kirk allegedly punching one of the promoters. Kirk was charged with battery in the incident, though those charges were eventually dropped.
The dismissal of the Las Vegas battery case comes at the end of a tumultuous 2021 for Kirk. The rapper faced intense scrutiny this summer after making misogynistic, homophobic, and ill-informed comments about AIDS victims at Rolling Loud Miami. While DaBaby lost a handful of major festival slots in the backlash, he maintained plenty of support and recently kicked off a North American tour with the support of Rolling Loud. In November, Kirk was involved in a live-streamed fracas with DaniLeigh, the singer and mother of his child (charges were filed against DaniLeigh, but none against Kirk).
NEWS
No matter what you thought of the Kendrick Lamar and Drake battle, there was only one undisputed winner by the end of it all: the reaction community in the worlds of streaming and YouTube. Your favorite content creators broke down the bars, reacted to all the most shocking moments, and helped this showdown become one of hip-hop's most culturally significant and resonant moments in a long time... For better or worse. See, the battle's technically not over yet, but only because the 6ix God's idea of victory is clearly quite different. In his federal defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group – his label – for releasing K.Dot's "Not Like Us," he named various content creators who allegedly helped boost the track's widespread popularity and, as a result, its supposedly defamatory nature.
Furthermore, the specific allegation that Drake brings up in this highly controversial lawsuit is that UMG "whitelisted" copyright claims for YouTubers, streamers, etc. concerning "Not Like Us." This means that they would be able to monetize their content without facing a copyright claim from UMG over "Not Like Us," and this isn't really an allegation because various creators have backed this up. But a few important (alleged) caveats that people are talking about online need to be clear. First, "whitelisting" supposedly happens on behalf of a record label behind a song like the West Coast banger, and UMG is instead the distributor of that track. Secondly, as rapper and online personality ScruFaceJean brings up as seen in the post below, tracks like "Push Ups" were also "whitelisted" by its team.
Along with Jean, many other of your favorite content creators spoke out against this Drake lawsuit. Zias! and B.Lou, for example, spoke with their lawyer about the possibility of countersuing for emotional distress, as they found the Toronto superstar's accusations and his implication of them very disturbing and misguided. NoLifeShaq also dragged The Boy through the mud, calling him "soft" and positing that, whether "whitelisting" happened or not, they would react to "Not Like Us" accordingly as they did to his own tracks.
In addition, it's important to bring up that many others fans have pointed to how Drake excitedly used streamers to generate hype and reaction clips for his own diss tracks against Kendrick Lamar. The most direct example is with Kai Cenat, whom he texted to "stay on stream" before dropping "Family Matters." Ironically, the Twitch giant appears in this clowned-upon defamation lawsuit as an example of what the OVO mogul's accusations and implications are. And one more thing: there is no direct link between monetization and algorithmic boosting on sites like YouTube. With all this in mind, content creators seem to feel almost insulted at the idea that they only reacted to the two biggest rappers in the world beefing with each other because one of them would allow them to make money. If Drizzy knew the first thing about the reaction community, maybe he wouldn't have included this...
