Drake owns some of his masters but not the ones that made him famous. The recordings from his first five studio albums, released between 2010 and 2018 under Young Money and Cash Money Records, are owned by Universal Music Group, which bought the Young Money catalog for a reported sum above $100 million in 2020. His 2022 deal with UMG, valued at roughly $400 million, reportedly gave him ownership of his newer recordings, though the exact contract terms remain private. So the honest answer to whether Drake owns his masters is: partly, and only for the more recent half of his career.
The Pre-2018 Catalog Belongs to Universal
Drake signed with Lil Wayne’s Young Money Entertainment, an imprint of Cash Money Records, early in his career.1Wikipedia. Young Money Entertainment Under that agreement, the labels financed production and marketing and took ownership of the master recordings in return. It is the standard arrangement for new artists without leverage.
The albums that came out of that deal are the commercial backbone of Drake’s career: Thank Me Later (2010), Take Care (2011), Nothing Was the Same (2013), Views (2016), and Scorpion (2018). Every one of them carries a Young Money/Cash Money recording copyright credit on streaming platforms.2Music Business Worldwide. Universal Music Group Acquired Young Money Catalog for Over $100m
In 2020, Lil Wayne sold the Young Money catalog to UMG for a reported figure north of $100 million.2Music Business Worldwide. Universal Music Group Acquired Young Money Catalog for Over $100m That transaction moved Drake’s early masters to UMG. Drake had no say in it. The original contract gave the label the right to transfer those assets, and Lil Wayne exercised that right.
Why He Couldn’t Stop the Sale
Standard recording contracts do two things that lock an artist out of ownership. First, they treat advances as recoupable debits, meaning the label recovers its recording, mixing, mastering, and marketing costs from the artist’s royalty share before the artist sees anything. An underperforming project can leave the artist unrecouped indefinitely while the label continues to own and license the masters.
Second, these contracts almost universally include “work made for hire” language, which classifies the recordings as the label’s property from the moment they are created. Labels typically pair that language with a backup assignment clause, so if a court ever rules that a recording is not a work for hire, the artist has already assigned the rights anyway. Work-for-hire status also strips the artist of the copyright termination rights that would otherwise let them reclaim ownership decades later.3U.S. Copyright Office. Sound Recordings as Works Made for Hire
What Changed in the 2022 UMG Deal
In 2022, Drake signed a multi-faceted agreement with UMG reported at around $400 million, covering recordings, publishing, merchandise, and visual media projects.4Variety. Drake Strikes Massive, Multi-Faceted Deal With Universal Music Group The contract terms have not been made public, but multiple industry sources have described the arrangement as closer to a partnership than a traditional record deal, with a net-profit split and a large guaranteed advance.
The structure matters for ownership. In a traditional deal, the label owns the masters and pays the artist a royalty rate, often 12 to 20 percent, after recoupment. A net-receipts arrangement splits income between the label and artist after agreed-upon costs, and artists in these structures typically keep the underlying ownership and license the recordings to the label for a defined period. When the license term expires, the rights revert to the artist.
Whether Drake’s 2022 deal formally functions as a licensing arrangement with reversion has not been publicly confirmed. One music attorney told Variety that Drake “has the bargaining power to negotiate a net profit split with the best deal terms and a humongous advance up front.”4Variety. Drake Strikes Massive, Multi-Faceted Deal With Universal Music Group Music Business Worldwide has reported that, like other superstars who negotiated modern deals, Drake ensured he owns the masters for albums released after the Young Money era.5Music Business Worldwide. Drake’s Anger Is the Product of an Unfortunate Era Drake himself alluded to owning masters on “The Remorse,” the closing track of Certified Lover Boy (2021).
OVO Sound and the Sony Distribution Path
Drake co-founded OVO Sound with producer Noah “40” Shebib and Oliver El-Khatib. The imprint signs and develops other artists, which puts Drake in an executive role sharing revenue from the label’s roster. In January 2024, OVO Sound announced a partnership with Sony Music’s Santa Anna Label Group for distribution, marketing, A&R support, and financial services, with OVO Sound remaining a standalone label.6Sony Music. Santa Anna Label Group to Partner With OVO Sound
Whether Drake’s own solo releases will eventually run through OVO Sound and Sony has not been confirmed, but the infrastructure now exists outside UMG. Running the label also means Drake likely controls the masters for OVO Sound’s signed artists, or at minimum shares them under more favorable splits than the ones he accepted as a young artist at Cash Money.
Can He Ever Reclaim the Old Masters?
Federal copyright law provides a termination-of-transfer mechanism that lets authors reclaim rights they signed away. Under 17 U.S.C. ยง 203, an artist can terminate a copyright grant starting 35 years after the grant was executed, within a five-year window, with notice served between two and ten years before the chosen termination date and recorded with the Copyright Office.7Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 17 USC 203 – Termination of Transfers and Licenses
For Drake, that math pushes any possible termination decades out. If his first recording contract was executed around 2009, the earliest 35-year window would open around 2044. And that timeline assumes his contract does not classify the recordings as works made for hire, which would foreclose termination entirely.3U.S. Copyright Office. Sound Recordings as Works Made for Hire Whether the original Young Money contract would survive a work-for-hire challenge is unclear, and the litigation to find out would be expensive.
Drake has not pursued the re-recording route that Taylor Swift used after her early masters were sold without her consent. The underlying problem is the same, but his response so far has been contractual rather than musical.
Where the UMG Conflict Stands
The relationship between Drake and UMG deteriorated publicly in 2024. That November, Drake filed a legal petition accusing UMG of artificially inflating the popularity of Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us” through pay-to-play schemes, bots, and the removal of copyright restrictions.8NBC News. Drake Files Federal Lawsuit Accusing UMG of Defamation In January 2025, he escalated with a federal defamation lawsuit alleging that UMG promoted the song to devalue his brand and gain leverage for a cheaper contract extension. A federal judge dismissed the case in October 2025, calling the exchange a “war of words” during a “heated rap battle.”9Billboard. Drake Lawsuit Over Kendrick Lamar’s Not Like Us Dismissed by Judge
In 2025, Drake released three projects simultaneously in what industry observers read as an effort to burn through remaining contractual album obligations. Those projects were still listed under “exclusive license to Republic Records,” so the legal ties to UMG remain active. Drake has publicly referenced wanting to “battle the label” and named private arbitration as his preferred resolution path. Full independence from Universal now looks like a question of contractual runway rather than intent, but the pre-2018 masters, the ones a general listener most associates with his name, are not part of what he can pull back with him.