Drake and streamer Adin Ross now face a high stakes courtroom battle that could redefine how power influence and money intersect with modern music metrics.
Drake faced a federal RICO lawsuit in New York alleging an illicit scheme to inflate music streams through crypto gambling ties
Drake is at the center of a sweeping federal class action lawsuit that accuses the global rap star and several high profile collaborators of orchestrating an artificial streaming operation designed to boost his music across major digital platforms. Court documents filed on New Year’s Eve outline a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act case that names the Toronto artist alongside crypto gambling company Stake and popular livestream personality Adin Ross, among others.
According to the complaint two plaintiffs allege that Stake’s tipping feature was used as a financial pipeline allowing defendants to send large sums of money to one another. That money was then allegedly used to fund automated streaming activity commonly referred to as botting in order to inflate the popularity of Drake’s catalog. The lawsuit claims this strategy fabricated demand manipulated charts and distorted recommendation algorithms on platforms such as Spotifywhile suppressing organic artists and misleading consumers.
The filing states that the tipping system allowed defendants to disguise transfers as giveaways while concealing the true flow of funds. Plaintiffs argue these transactions were encrypted and not easily visible to the public which allegedly helped mask the operation. One example cited in the complaint references a $100,000 tip described as a transfer between Drake and Ross in 2023.
The lawsuit further alleges that the operation extended beyond isolated transfers.
Court documents point to December 2024 when Drake partnered with Ross and Stake for what was promoted publicly as the Drizzmas Giveaway. Plaintiffs contend that these high value giveaways were part of a broader pattern of financial coordination tied to artificial streaming efforts rather than simple promotional generosity.
In one of the more eye catching allegations the filing also references a vehicle valued at roughly $220,000 that Stake allegedly gifted to Ross just days before the lawsuit was filed. Plaintiffs argue this gift fits the same pattern of concealed compensation tied to the alleged scheme.
At the heart of the complaint plaintiffs claim Drake acted knowingly and with intent while working alongside willing co-conspirators. The lawsuit alleges that automated bots and streaming farms were deployed across interstate digital pathways to inject inauthentic streams into royalty and recommendation systems. Those inflated numbers plaintiffs argue manufactured popularity diverted revenue and attention and undermined trust in curated music experiences.
No court has ruled on the claims and none of the defendants have been found liable.
As with all civil litigation, the allegations remain unproven and will be tested through motions and potential discovery. Still, the case adds another layer to ongoing conversations around streaming integrity transparency and the influence of money in the digital music economy.
Drake has not commented publicly on the case.
Related
