Posted on 08/24/2021 9:18:37 PM PDT by nickcarraway
Spencer Elden, the man who, as a baby, posed for the iconic cover image to Nirvana’s Nevermind is reportedly suing the band and Kurt Cobain’s estate, claiming he was exploited for the picture.
Court documents allege the band “knowingly produced, possessed, and advertised commercial child pornography depicting Spencer, and they knowingly received value in exchange for doing so.”
According to Elden, photographer Kirk Weddle took pictures of his naked body “in poses highlighting and emphasizing Spencer’s exposed genitals.”
The suit further alleges that Cobain “agreed to redact Spencer’s image by releasing the album with a sticker strategically placed over Spencer’s genitals with the text: ‘If you’re offended by this, you must be a closet pedophile.’” Such a sticker was “never incorporated” into the album’s cover.
Interestingly, the suit cites album covers for Scorpion’s Virgin Killer, Blind Faith’s Blind Faith, and Van Halen’s Balance as other examples of previous “controversial campaigns used to promote music with sexually explicit material depicting a child or outright child pornography.”
“Neither Spencer nor his legal guardians ever signed a release authorizing the use of any images of Spencer or of his likeness, and certainly not of commercial child pornography depicting him,” the documents further state.
Elden claims that the image has caused him to “suffer lifelong damages."
Released Sept. 24, 1991, Nevermind would become one of the most legendary albums in rock history. The LP rocketed Nirvana to stardom and became the definitive release of the grunge revolution. Its cover, featuring the naked four-month-old Elden in a swimming pool, being lured by a dollar bill on a fishing line, ranks among the most iconic album covers of all time. According to a 2008 report from NPR, Elden’s father, Rick, was paid $200 for his child’s modeling work.
In adulthood, Elden has recreated the famous cover on multiple occasions. Though he has “Nevermind” tattooed on his chest, Elden’s view of the iconic image has seemingly changed in recent years. In 2016, he admitted to GQ Australia that he was “pissed off” about the picture. “I’ve been going through it my whole life. But recently I’ve been thinking, ‘What if I wasn’t OK with my freaking penis being shown to everybody?,” Elden explained at the time. “I didn’t really have a choice.”
I agree with the man suing.
No one should make money over selling naked baby pictures. Except perhaps for valid medical purposes.
I’ll probably be a minority in FR but nope.
Why did people allow it at the time?
Nirvana was not an Establisment Band. Grohl has gone from "challenge authority" to "suck up to authority."
Rick Schroeder is right - Kurt is turning over in his grave.
The Coppertone tot would have a case too under this logic.
I don’t think that was the same degree of exposure.
This is where rational people say “This is retarded.” and tell the lawyers and the entire legal profession to pack sand.
Normal people do not get aroused by pictures like this. We have a decision, we either all live under penalties designed to punish sick pedophiles or maybe we just loosen the government overreach on everyone normal and start executing pedophiles every time we catch them.
I was about 20 at the time that came out and it struck me as cringey at the time.
“Elden claims that the image has caused him to “suffer lifelong damages.””
I believe Elden and support him. I remember when the Nirvana album was released and saw the cover. It was a shock: gross, stupid and repulsive. I was insulted by the stupid band and their stupid managers. Cobain was brilliant but unethical, depressed and grungy. I also remember at guitarist for a top punk band scolding me for not liking Nirvana at the time. Oh well. Play with fire, get burned. Nirvana is ancient history now like Foreigner, Toto, and Three Day Stubble.
Idiotic, God-damned, moral fascist thinking. Normal people don't get turned on by pictures of babies. Execute the pedophiles and leave the rest of us normal people alone.
If you have raised your own children you know that these pictures are inherently innocent.
Nutjobs are everywhere. I have a few family pictures like this of my own children as babies/toddlers and there is not a goddamned thing wrong with it.
It’s about time. I always found these things disturbing. There were sometimes software ads in computer magazines with naked babies and it made no sense at all.
I would have thought that submerging a baby without support like they did would create more liability than the lack of a diaper or swim suit.
Ironically, the album that knocked Michael Jackson off the top of the charts.
It’s art. You need to look at Renaissance art in Italy. And quit being a prude. Americans are so uptight when it comes to stuff like this.
I think the laws were changed after those images were made. They were considered “pre-ban,” to borrow a firearms term.
What about Blind Faith?
pornographers’ always play the game that this is the exception to the CP rule and then say that there is artistic reasons. even if this is just money grab and the guy was not hurt. the fact that this was allowed to be produced was wrong and those involved should be sued over this if only to prevent others in the entertainment industry from thinking they are the exception that should be allowed.
I don’t know that that cover was illegal...just controversial.
Whatta stupid ruckus over a naked baby.
As if everybody hasn’t seen any of those, ever.
Now there’s fold-down changing tables in restrooms all over the place; a body could walk in on a naked baby nearly any day of the week.
Ohhh, but THIS one — THIS naked baby, whhyyyy THIS naked baby’s DIFFERENT, ya see. DIFFERENT, I tell ya!
Ya wanna know HOW?
YEAH? Well, I’LL TELL tell ya how. THIS naked baby’s different, because his little naked baby picture — which nobody particularly gave a rat’s ass bout, until this week —
that pic is attached to the estate of a millionaire, and to the financial holdings of that now-departed millionaire’s former band mates.
I DEFY ANYBODY to tell me this is about any more, nor any less than ALL the Benjamins.
If Nirvana had tanked, and gone nowhere musically, this case would NEVER be brought. But there’s MONEY to be had, and sleazy lawyers willing to go the extra mile to help knock it loose; “We win, or we don’t get paid! Call us toll free right NOW: 1-800-EAT-RICH! What ARE you waiting for??”
C’MON, BABY, EAT THE RICH!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wh3t49NsWBA
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.