SPIDER-MAN Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/25/entertainment/spencer-elden-nirvana-nevermind-lawsuit-scli-intl/index.html Quote (CNN)Spencer Elden, who appeared as a naked baby on the cover of Nirvana's 1991 album "Nevermind," has claimed the record's iconic artwork is child pornography and is suing the band over alleged "child sexual exploitation." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemack8 Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 Someone is hard up for money 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 11 minutes ago, mikemack8 said: Someone is hard up for money After he did a recreation of it 5 years ago. What a d bag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemack8 Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 4 minutes ago, downundermike said: After he did a recreation of it 5 years ago. What a d bag. Yeah - and he's really not asking for much by today's standards - I bet they'll settle Although you'd think his parents would have signed off on it at the time, so he may not have anything to go off of Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeanMeanGM Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 2 hours ago, mikemack8 said: Yeah - and he's really not asking for much by today's standards - I bet they'll settle Although you'd think his parents would have signed off on it at the time, so he may not have anything to go off of I dunno, they may have just taken a naked baby and threw it in a pool without consent. It was an edgy time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homerpat Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 3 hours ago, mikemack8 said: Yeah - and he's really not asking for much by today's standards - I bet they'll settle Although you'd think his parents would have signed off on it at the time, so he may not have anything to go off of He doesn’t. His parents were paid and they signed off on use. He’s just looking for attention after having already capitalized multiple times from it. Now he’s broke he needs more money and attention 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Omega Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 This lawsuit is ridiculous, but I would love to be there when they try to pry any settlement check out of Courtney Love’s resin stained fingers. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeanMeanGM Posted August 26, 2021 Share Posted August 26, 2021 6 hours ago, The_Omega said: This lawsuit is ridiculous, but I would love to be there when they try to pry any settlement check out of Courtney Love’s resin stained fingers. I can’t believe she’s still alive, as bad as typing that out makes me feel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wormlegs Posted August 26, 2021 Share Posted August 26, 2021 This seems sad and pathetic and a money grab scheme. I hope the judge laughs at him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green_Guinness Posted August 26, 2021 Share Posted August 26, 2021 I just watched the documentary Soaked In Bleach for the 2nd time (first time was a while ago) and then saw this thread. So yeah, F Courtney Love. Grohl now makes enough off Foo Fighters so he won't miss any money from Nirvana royalties, but she will. It's a stupid lawsuit, but still hope he gets a little sumpin sumpin just so it's less that she has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 27, 2021 Share Posted August 27, 2021 26 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said: It’s sad. And pathetic. But that doesn’t that’s what the law will say. His parents had to have signed something. Record company execs k ow how to cover their @ss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wormlegs Posted August 27, 2021 Share Posted August 27, 2021 12 hours ago, downundermike said: His parents had to have signed something. Record company execs k ow how to cover their @ss Exactly. I have 2 kids (both 17 now) but parents would have had to sign legal paperwork in order to post their nude underage child on an album cover Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bwestbrook36 Posted August 30, 2021 Share Posted August 30, 2021 On 8/26/2021 at 10:44 PM, downundermike said: His parents had to have signed something. Record company execs k ow how to cover their @ss so according the one article i read on it said that this dude changes his tune every time the anniversary of the album comes up. One minute he loves it the next he is trying to sue for it. They say he does have a case though. His case is that as a baby he didnt have the choice to expose himself and took away his innocence without even knowing it. A lady just won 15,000 bucks for suing her work place for excluding her from the friday pizza parties for F sakes lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toolg Posted September 1, 2021 Share Posted September 1, 2021 There's an allegory when the album was made, the band and the record company had some debate about the picture on the cover. Kurt relented they could cover up the pic with a sticker saying "if this offends you, you must be a closet pedophile." I also heard the parents sold the pic for like $200 or something. They made a bad deal. If they had asked 1% of royalties of album sales, they'd have made tens of thousands of dollars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boogyman Posted September 1, 2021 Share Posted September 1, 2021 On 8/26/2021 at 5:01 AM, 4for4EaglesNest said: I mean it stands to reason. The picture was of him reaching for money underwater. I hope he gets it just to F Courtney Love over. I can’t imagine Grohl carrying that much about that little amount of money. I'd assume he carries a bit more cash on him than the average person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boogyman Posted September 1, 2021 Share Posted September 1, 2021 On 8/26/2021 at 10:17 PM, 4for4EaglesNest said: It’s sad. And pathetic. But that doesn’t that’s what the law will say. Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paco Posted September 1, 2021 Share Posted September 1, 2021 Apparently: The Former Baby From Nirvana’s Famous Album Cover Was Motivated to Sue After the Band Blew Off His Art Show Quote However, his enthusiasm appears to have waned in recent years. In a 2016 interview with GQ Australia, Elden said his stance on the photograph changed after he reached out to Nirvana to see if the band would participate in an art show he was putting on. "I was asking if they wanted to put a piece of art in the Fing thing,” he said. "I was getting referred to their managers and their lawyers. Why am I still on their cover if I’m not that big of a deal?” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 1, 2021 Share Posted September 1, 2021 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Omega Posted September 1, 2021 Share Posted September 1, 2021 1 hour ago, paco said: Apparently: The Former Baby From Nirvana’s Famous Album Cover Was Motivated to Sue After the Band Blew Off His Art Show Everyone buys albums for the cover. That explains why Metallica's Black album was such a commercial failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now