Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Nirvana baby to sue…

281 replies

Toffu · 25/08/2021 08:38

I’ve just read an article about the man who’s photo as a baby was used on the cover of Nevermind.

He is planning to sue the band for violating pornography laws and claims that his parents never signed a release allowing Nirvana to use the photo.

He alleges Nirvana "used child pornography depicting Spencer as an essential element of a record promotion scheme commonly utilized in the music industry to get attention, wherein album covers posed children in a sexually provocative manner to gain notoriety, drive sales, and garner media attention, and critical reviews." He says he’s suffered and will co it is to suffer lifelong damages.

While a lot of people (judging by online comments) seem to think it’s a money grab, I’m inclined to agree with him. Imagine if Michael Jackson or Take That had done this? Is it considered ok because it’s rock music, an arty shot and he’s a boy? Am I being unreasonable to think actually it’s really not ok?

OP posts:
DrSbaitso · 25/08/2021 11:21

But then, maybe that's why I'm not a jillionaire rock star.

category12 · 25/08/2021 11:23

@DrSbaitso

But then, maybe that's why I'm not a jillionaire rock star.
Or dead.
sleepygnome · 25/08/2021 11:23

I agree with him. If it was a naked little girl baby I think there would be a lot more MNers against it. I'd hate to have photos of myself as a baby naked for everyone to see. It's an invasion of privacy from a very early age and obviously he couldn't give his consent. Seems like exploitation by his parents and the music industry.

IveGotASongThatllGetOnYNerves · 25/08/2021 11:24

He'll struggle to make a successful case given he has recreated it, given interviews etc surely?
Plus, they didn't swipe him off the street and chuck him in a pool. If he wants to sue anyone, it should be his parents. For the 200 they got, plus interest. 🤷‍♀️

DrSbaitso · 25/08/2021 11:26

Or dead.

That too.

category12 · 25/08/2021 11:27

@DrSbaitso

Or dead.

That too.

Swings and roundabouts, innit Grin
EmpressSuiko · 25/08/2021 11:33

@AntiSocialDistancer Nirvana still has a huge following, In Utero has some amazing songs on it, it’s one of my favourite albums from them, plenty of people would recognise that cover

MumofBoys79 · 25/08/2021 11:37

Never considered it to be pornographic, merely artistic, making a statement. Don't think the photo would have had the same impact if wearing swimming shorts as I think the nakedness is meant to signify purity/innocence.

Personally, I'd like to have been featured on such an iconic album cover!

His parents should have sought payment at the time.

FreeBritnee · 25/08/2021 11:42

I never noticed either! Perhaps it’s because in the old days it was just a small image on a CD.

daisy46 · 25/08/2021 11:43

he's still chasing dollars . . . Hmm

Tossblanket · 25/08/2021 11:54

Obviously short of a few quid is he.

Backwaterjunction · 25/08/2021 12:03

I’ve never liked the cover always felt icky about it even as a rock fan, but all I can say is if the band didn’t kidnap the baby and photograph him then they must have had permission from the parents and it’s there fault, I am a child of the 70s and I know for a fact my parents never left me with anyone that wasn’t family. The lawsuit is going nowhere

suckingonchillidogs · 25/08/2021 12:03

According to one news story (news.com.au/entertainment) in 2016 25 year old Elden recreated the cover and "I said to the photographer 'let's do it naked' but he thought that would be weird so I wore my swim shorts". So yeah, obviously scarred for life 🙄

VyrnwyGirl · 25/08/2021 12:05

It's not even remotely pornographic, and as a few posters have said; the people who say it IS pornographic, well it speaks volumes about them.

It's just a body part FFS. And as has been said, no-one would even have known it was him if he hadn't been blathering on about it for years.

I don't think he has a case personally.

youvemademyshitlist · 25/08/2021 12:07

He's recreated the image several times over the years. He had the word "never mind" tattooed in massive letters on his chest.
He's said in interviews over the years that it's opened doors for him to meet and work with artists.

If he'd been really traumatised by it, he wouldn't have done any of those things. And if he hadn't repeatedly recreated the image, no one would ever see him and go "hey, are you the baby on the cover of Nevermind?"

Nirvana baby to sue…
DrSbaitso · 25/08/2021 12:12

He's allowed to change his mind.

Macncheeseballs · 25/08/2021 12:16

Maybe they should have used something like this instead or is that as equally offensive

Nirvana baby to sue…
Marmaladeagain · 25/08/2021 12:20

I honestly wouldn't have ever considered it appropriate to show others a photo of my baby naked. I do think it's private and I'd also think when the child grows up they might not like it or be angry about it TBH.

Be like showing the family photos and come across one taken during bathtime or something - there's nothing wrong with it I just wouldn't show it to someone else and I'd expect the dc to grab it off me even if I did want to show it off. It's their body not mine. I just know I'd be embarrased myself if there was a photo out there of me naked as a baby (some obviously wouldn't be) but some would. That's the issue no way of knowing is there as a baby can't let you know - they will do when they get older though.

Yes Art has lots of naked babies but they're not real living people with a name and tax number.

Kithic · 25/08/2021 12:29

@Toffu

“Someone clearly wants money and attention”

Like the band did when they used his naked photo to get these things?

i disagree - he was happy enough to exploit the image himself.

In a 2016 interview with GQ Australia, he said: "Recently I've been thinking, 'What if I wasn't OK with my freaking penis being shown to everybody?' I didn't really have a choice."

Speak to your dad, who was happy to sell the image

He told the publication that he had tried to get Nirvana and Weddle involved in an art project of his own, but had been referred to their manager and lawyers.

Elden also explained that women would would dump him when they realised he wasn't earning royalties from the album.
Well stop telling them then!?!

VyrnwyGirl · 25/08/2021 12:29

@youvemademyshitlist

He's recreated the image several times over the years. He had the word "never mind" tattooed in massive letters on his chest. He's said in interviews over the years that it's opened doors for him to meet and work with artists.

If he'd been really traumatised by it, he wouldn't have done any of those things. And if he hadn't repeatedly recreated the image, no one would ever see him and go "hey, are you the baby on the cover of Nevermind?"

Exactly this. ^ Re, the image you posted at 12.07, this doesn't strike me as a young man who is traumatised by his image being used 30 years ago, for an album cover. All I am seeing is an attention-seeking individual who is desperate for fame, and some cash-money.
category12 · 25/08/2021 12:32

Elden also explained that women would would dump him when they realised he wasn't earning royalties from the album.
Well stop telling them then!?!

Yep, can't really expect the women attracted by his feigned fame & fortune to stick around when they realise there isn't any.

Kithic · 25/08/2021 12:33

@DrSbaitso

If I had been that baby, I think I would be feeling very uncomfortable now. I may not be recognisable but that isn't really the point.

Provocative images so often rest on the bodies of those who aren't in control of the narrative or situation.

but if you were the baby, and you were uncomfortable, surely you wouldn't be going round telling people you were the baby? etc
DrSbaitso · 25/08/2021 12:39

but if you were the baby, and you were uncomfortable, surely you wouldn't be going round telling people you were the baby? etc

I don't know. I might, just because it's a famous image and it might look a bit funny if someone discovered one day it was me and I'd never said anything. Or I might have thought I was drawing the sting, if I felt there was one. Or maybe I thought it was cool when I was younger but now I have a child of my own I feel differently.

I don't know. None of us have been in that situation. But I think people in these sorts of circumstances are allowed to change their minds.

Whattodoffs · 25/08/2021 13:18

I read an article on this and apparently he asked the band (remaining members) for some help with an art project, not sure how true that is?
He's also re-created the image in each of the album's anniversaries (i.e. 10yr, 20 yrs etc). He even said in an interview in 2016 that the album cover has helped him as he grew up. There are loads of pictures of him as an adult holding the album cover!
He may decide that he doesn't like it now and that's his perogative, but to try and make money from that now just screams "money making scheme"

IntermittentParps · 25/08/2021 13:19

I agree with him. If it was a naked little girl baby I think there would be a lot more MNers against it.
Why?

I'd hate to have photos of myself as a baby naked for everyone to see. It's an invasion of privacy from a very early age and obviously he couldn't give his consent. Seems like exploitation by his parents and the music industry.
It's been asked already, but: how would people come to know that baby was you/him unless they were told?