"Any claim based on the alleged use of Plaintiffs' recording is is barred because, inter alia, (a) the allegedly copied portion of the Plaintiff's recording is not part of the musical composition; and, if it is part of the composition, (b) is not protectable and/or (c) any use was de minimus."
Basically — what they sampled isn't protectable, and even if it is, it was probably created before the copywriting of sound and thus doesn't fall under it.
Either way they claim they're not at fault and aren't saying whether or not if they were anything past inspired by his work.
We'll have to wait to see if this goes to court, and if so, who will win!
[Image via WENN.]