Photo Credit: Raph_PH
A federal court has tossed an infringement lawsuit filed against Sony Music, Beyoncé’s Parkwood Entertainment, and others over an allegedly unauthorized sample in 2022’s “Alien Superstar.”
Judge Mark Scarsi just recently dismissed the copyright and breach of contract complaint for lack of standing. And as is so often the case in rights-related disputes, the legal battle isn’t light on multifaceted background details.
But in brief, plaintiff Hirose Enterprises is said to own a piece (or perhaps all) of 1998’s “Moon-Raker,” which John Holiday, also a defendant, penned and recorded as Johnny Dangerous/Foremost Poets.
This refers specifically to “100% ownership of the sound recording” and 50% ownership (or 100%, per the amended complaint as opposed to the initial iteration) on the publishing side.
Meanwhile, both Hirose Enterprises and the entity (Soundmen on Wax) that’s said to have transferred the rights are headed by an individual named Shuji Hirose.
Putting the information on the backburner for a moment, Sony Music and Parkwood nevertheless opted to license the “Moon-Raker” sample from Holiday himself. The track’s spoken-word introduction therefore factors prominently into “Alien Superstar,” which released on Renaissance and credits Holiday.
Unsurprisingly, given the suit, the allegedly unauthorized usage didn’t sit right with Hirose Enterprises, which claimed to have scooped up the IP in question as part of a 2008 deal.
But in March 2026, the court acknowledged the defendants’ argument that Hirose had failed to submit written proof of the assignment.
More pressingly, “a search of Hirose on the Florida Secretary of State demonstrates that Hirose was formed on August 6, 2025—seventeen years after the alleged 2008 copyright assignment,” the appropriate order reads.
Additionally, “[t]he dissolution of Soundmen effectively renders Soundmen’s inability to hold intellectual property rights as the entity no longer existed,” per the March decision, which also spelled out that “Hirose, a non-existent entity at the relevant period, could not have obtained a copyright assignment.”
Back to the present, those determinations set the stage for Judge Scarsi’s dismissal without prejudice on jurisdictional grounds – a dismissal that materialized “before reaching any of the parties’ merits arguments.”
As such, we’re technically without a concrete answer as to whether the allegedly unauthorized use constitutes infringement. However, we do know that the filing company, having “signaled over a month ago that it would move to join Hirose Enterprise LLC and Shuji Hirose as plaintiffs,” still “has not done so.”
“Without a properly noticed motion by Plaintiff or the proposed new parties, the Court is left with a defective pleading and no party with standing to prosecute the asserted claim,” Judge Scarsi noted.
Though the defendants were looking to toss the complaint with prejudice, the court, as mentioned, dismissed without prejudice – meaning the suit can be refiled down the line.
