Drake is currently entangled in a new legal dispute in 2026. The popular Toronto musician has been implicated in a proposed class-action lawsuit in the United States. The lawsuit alleges that Drake, along with others, utilized funds from a gambling website to disguise money transfers, which were then used to artificially boost his streaming music plays.
The lawsuit revolves around Stake.us, the U.S. platform of the online casino operator Stake, headquartered in Curaçao, which Drake frequently endorses on his social media channels. The lawsuit claims that Drake, whose real name is Aubrey Graham, played a central role in the operation. It alleges that he collaborated with social media influencer Adin Ross to promote the platform by gambling with virtual currencies surreptitiously provided by Stake.
None of the accusations have been substantiated in court, and representatives for Drake and Stake have not yet responded to requests for comments. The plaintiff’s legal team is demanding a jury trial and seeking a minimum of $5 million US in damages and legal costs.
The lawsuit was initiated on December 31, 2025, in a Virginia court by LaShawnna Ridley and Tiffany Hines, on behalf of all Stake.us users. George Nguyen is also listed as a defendant, purportedly acting as a facilitator and operational intermediary.
The legal claim contends that Stake.us is an illicit online gambling platform established to bypass restrictions after Stake.com was prohibited from operating in the U.S. Although marketed as a “social casino” that does not involve real money gambling, the site reportedly utilizes “Stake Cash,” convertible to cryptocurrency or digital gift cards, effectively constituting real money.
The plaintiffs further assert that Drake, Ross, and Nguyen exploited the casino’s “tipping” feature to transfer funds among themselves, some of which were used to manipulate streaming platforms like Spotify. The lawsuit alleges that these actions were employed to generate fake streams of Drake’s music, artificially enhancing his popularity, distorting streaming playlists, and misleading royalty and recommendation systems.
According to the lawsuit, these activities resulted in “suppressing genuine artists and limiting consumers’ access to authentic content by undermining the credibility of curated music streaming experiences.”