Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2021 10:31 am Post subject: Baby in the "Nevermind" video Sueing Nirvana For Kiddie Porn
Quote:
Spencer Elden is suing the band for child sexual exploitation, saying he was unable to consent to having his image used for the iconic 1991 album.
Nirvana’s surviving members and the estate of Kurt Cobain have been sued by Spencer Elden, who appeared as a baby on the cover of 1991’s Nevermind. Elden claims the band violated federal child pornography statutes and argues child sexual exploitation
Nevermind _________________ I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail.
Joined: 10 Dec 2006 Posts: 52624 Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2021 10:36 am Post subject:
Elden claims he has suffered “lifelong damages” and says his legal guardians never signed a release “authorizing the use of any images of Spencer or of his likeness, and certainly not of commercial child pornography depicting him.”
He had no problem recreating the photo as an adult awhile back though . . .
That said, if the photo was indeed used without the proper release, he has a point both there. _________________ You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
^ Even if a release was signed, it was never agreed to by the actual person involved. Would the release shift the blame from Nirvana's estate to the parents/guardians or would it be shared?
Regardless of if this is opportunistic money grabbing or not I think it raises some awareness of how we should be looking at what parents will do to make money off of their children.
If the album cover is considered kiddie porn, do we lock up all of the 90’s punk rockers who bought and shared that nirvana album?
Federal law defines child pornography as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor
I fail to see how tossing an infant into a pool would meet that definition? I think an argument for child abuse could possibly be made, be even that would be a stretch of gargantuan proportions, especially considering that a large number of people learned how to swim in just that very manner.
This reeks of a child who was raised by irresponsible groupies and now has a crappy life and is searching for a way to get some quick cash anyway he can cobble together.I'll be very disappointed if some nutty judge, or jury, let's this knob get away with it. _________________ I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail.
Joined: 10 Dec 2006 Posts: 52624 Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2021 12:00 pm Post subject:
C M B wrote:
This is the worst thing that ever happened to nirvana.
Other than Kurt's sweater anyway. _________________ You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
If the album cover is considered kiddie porn, do we lock up all of the 90’s punk rockers who bought and shared that nirvana album?
Or Houses of the Holy, or Blind Faith. _________________ “Properly read, the bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived.”
― Isaac Asimov
Suing Nirvana now is throwing out the baby with the poolwater.
There are even more moronic suits filed all the time. Just look at those from Sidney Powell and Rudy Goonie. Donald sued Maher for saying his mother was an orangutan. You can't sue people for the truth, Don. _________________ GOAT MAGIC REEL SEDALE TRIBUTE EDDIE DONX!
lol, this has to be some kind of joke. Dude got the word 'Nevermind' tattooed across his entire chest - presumably, as an adult. What a ridiculous lawsuit. _________________
Attached below is a link to the Actual lawsuit. It seeks $150,000 in damages. They are hinging their "Sexual Claim" on the following:
Quote:
Nirvana, L.L.C. ultimately decided to use a dollar bill on a fishhook as
4 a prop—after an extensive debate between the use of a dollar bill, raw meat, a dog, and other objects commonly associated with prurient interests
ie, The dollar bill being dangled as payment for the baby being nude makes it sexually exploitive.
Lawsuit _________________ I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail.
Joined: 10 Dec 2006 Posts: 52624 Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2021 6:02 pm Post subject:
Aussiesuede wrote:
Attached below is a link to the Actual lawsuit. It seeks $150,000 in damages.*They are hinging their "Sexual Claim" on the following:
Quote:
Nirvana, L.L.C. ultimately decided to use a dollar bill on a fishhook as
4 a prop—after an extensive debate between the use of a dollar bill, raw meat, a dog, and other objects commonly associated with prurient interests
ie, The dollar bill being dangled as payment for the baby being nude makes it sexually exploitive.
*Each from Grohl, Novocelic, the Cobain Estate and several other involved parties. _________________ You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90299 Location: Formerly Known As 24
Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2021 8:26 pm Post subject:
Dude has spent his whole life trying to small time grift off of being the baby in that pic, and now he’s trying to get a big payday. Realistically, he needs to sue his parents who allowed the pic for 200 bucks. And quite frankly, without the pic, which he has recreated multiple times for attention, no one would know who he is. _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Joined: 10 Dec 2006 Posts: 52624 Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2021 9:43 pm Post subject:
lakersken80 wrote:
If he really did have a problem with it he wouldn't have recreated the image in adulthood....rather this seems like a last attempt at a money grab.
Yep. As I said earlier, it will all come down to the original contract that was signed at the time. If his parents/guardians clearly had no problem with the deal at the time, and there are no legal glitches there, I can’t see any recourse for him considering he’s embraced the situation as an adult.
The more interesting legal argument resides with the idea of a naked baby being exploited for financial gain. But that opens a whole huge Pandora’s box, such as, why was that album cover allowed to be produced and distributed in the first place without any regulatory body stopping it. And that liability doesn’t reside with the band or their management. _________________ You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
Good point and one that I missed. I'm not a lawyer, but there are a limited number of ways to extend the tolling of SOL. Usually they pertain to the discovery of new evidence but they tend be applicable to criminal tort law rather than civil law. Color me shocked if this lawsuit isn't tossed.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum