Diddy is facing a legal counterpunch from NBCUniversal, which has asked a judge to throw out his $100 million defamation lawsuit over a documentary that the network argues is protected by free speech and rooted in public interest.

The media giant, along with Peacock TV and Ample Entertainment, filed a motion to dismiss Diddy’s complaint, asserting that the documentary Diddy: The Making of a Bad Boy neither defamed him nor caused new damage to his public image.

The film aired on Peacock in January 2025 and includes commentary on Diddy’s upbringing, career, and a series of lawsuits and criminal charges that have engulfed him in recent years.

Diddy filed the massive suit earlier this year, claiming the documentary falsely portrayed him as a violent predator and criminal mastermind.

His legal team argues the documentary “shamelessly promotes conspiracy theories” and portrays him as an incarnation of “Lucifer,” comparing him to Jeffrey Epstein.

NBC contends the film simply reflects a broader conversation already unfolding in the media.

NBC’s legal filing argues that Diddy’s reputation was already under intense scrutiny before the documentary aired and his July 2025 conviction on prostitution-related charges did nothing to help his arguments, not to mention the hundreds of civil lawsuits accusing him of sexual assault and abuse.

The lawsuit also takes issue with segments referencing the deaths of Diddy’s former partner Kimberly Porter and rappers Christopher “The Notorious B.I.G.” Wallace and Heavy D.

NBC says the film did not accuse Diddy of murder but instead explored public speculation and theories, many of which had already circulated through national outlets.

The network states that those statements originated from interviewees and were not endorsed by the producers.

NBC’s defense mirrors the argument made by attorney Ariel Mitchell, who is also seeking dismissal of a separate $50 million defamation suit filed by Diddy.

Mitchell appeared on Newsmax with a client who claimed to possess flash drives showing Diddy with minors. Mitchell argues that Diddy’s reputation had already been “irreparably damaged” by his criminal case. Like Mitchell, NBC wants the judge to dismiss the case.

Diddy remains in custody while awaiting sentencing on October 3 after he was convicted on two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution.

Diddy is facing a new legal hurdle in his $50 million defamation lawsuit after Miami-based attorney Ariel Mitchell asked a federal judge to dismiss the case.

Mitchell, who briefly appeared on a NewsNation segment with Courtney Burgess, is accused by Diddy of helping spread what the Bad Boy founder calls “outrageous lies” about his alleged involvement in sex crimes.

The lawsuit, filed in January 2025, also names Burgess and Nexstar Media, which owns NewsNation, as co-defendants.

Burgess claimed during the interview that he received 11 flash drives from the late Kim Porter, which he said contained videos of celebrities participating in “Freakoffs” involving minors.

He also said he had 54 pages from Porter’s memoirs, which Porter’s kids said were fake.

Mitchell’s attorney, Steven A. Metcalf II, argued that her appearance on the program did not include any defamatory statements and that her role as an attorney shields her from liability.

“In addition to performing her role as an attorney for matters involving the preparation of litigation or for pending litigation, such vicarious attributions concerning Defendant Mitchell violate First Amendment principles separating actual speech from associative liability,” Metcalf said.

Mitchell is also arguing that the government’s seizure of the alleged flash drives with the videos supports her statements that she was basically telling the truth.

“Mitchell cannot be said to have acted with reckless disregard for the truth. Photos and videos were produced, leading to a federal subpoena for this specific material. Then the government or members of the Southern District acted in manner to take possession of said materials, and thus the government essentially vouched for its existence of said materials,” Metcalf added.

Diddy has denied all allegations, stating that the claims are fabricated. His lawsuit alleges that the defendants orchestrated a media campaign that harmed his business and personal life.

Mitchell’s legal filing asserts that even if her comments were damaging, they are protected under the legal immunity for attorneys, unless actual malice can be proven.

Diddy was found guilty on two counts of transporting individuals across state lines for prostitution on July 2, 2025, after a months-long federal trial in New York.

Mitchell’s lawyer stated that there was no way she could defame Diddy, given the salacious and wild testimony produced by several witnesses during his trial.

“The evidence elicited at trial was extreme to the point where any living person’s reputation would be affected from such…while I salute his criminal defense team – the fact relevant here is that there are countless of other individuals with actual sexual allegations against Plaintiff, where any statement Mitchell made is pale in comparison and is merely a drop in the bucket,” Metcalf argued.