Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Nirvana Nevermind cover baby suing for exploitation

  • 25-08-2021 1:57pm
    #1
    Posts: 0


    (Can't link yet).

    Crikey. Lionel Hutz style law practice or does he have a point?

    Child sexual exploitation - does context not matter? Or is any child nudity sexual? I wouldn't like a child's bits being on display in any context - but wouldn't that be the parents' responsibility?



Comments

  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Its absolute bollocks. The lawyer is saying that the money which was superimposed onto the image makes his client look like a sex worker.

    It's the most blatant cash grab ever and a slap into the face to people who have been genuinely sexually exploited.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,014 ✭✭✭archfi


    He wants 150k from each of them and the estate of Cobain, must be a bit short of the old shekels.

    I mean, I searched his name and all i got was him posing quite willingly for photos as an adult as the 'baby off the cover'.

    Surely no one would have known it was him if he hadn't come forward for the various mag shots and publicity. The only possible bad thing is if his parents didn't give permission.

    A thing isn't what it says it is.

    A thing is what it does.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 959 ✭✭✭DarkJager21


    Pure nonsense lawsuit.

    1) Parents responsibility for allowing the photo, he should sue them instead.

    2) Nobody would even know it is him if he didn't keep "recreating" the photo.

    3) "Spencer Elden, now 30, is suing the band's surviving members as well as Kurt Cobain's estate, claiming that he could not consent to being pictured on the 1991 album cover" - A 4 month old can't consent to anything, new wave woke nonsense retroactively being applied to historical events. Much like asking a 4 month old for permission to change their nappy like was suggested by an Australian group recently. See point 1 above, until you are 18 your consent is given by your parents. Sue them instead.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,596 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    I'm surprised this hadnt happened before. Theres never much motivation required for an American to start suing.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,184 ✭✭✭85603


    Haha. It really is just a game these days. Everyones having a shot. Sure why not.

    Im pretty sure a teacher fecked some chalk at me in 2nd class.

    Gib monies.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,862 ✭✭✭Mysterypunter


    His parents were paid $200 for the original picture, so that means they were exploiting him, so they are the ones he should be suing, it is a blatant and sad attempt to make a few quid, so i hope it doesn’t work, but I think he has taken advantage of the current state of the world, and the way it’s gone, anything is possible, but to sum it up I think nirvana were subsequently successful and this chap wasn’t, so that is the most simplistic explanation and possibly the one nearest the mark.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 52 ✭✭Sy Kick


    All this greed with people - it would drain you.



  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 18,808 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kimbot


    Didnt the same guy get "Nevermind" tattoo'd on himself?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,515 ✭✭✭Tork


    The requests for him to recreate the album cover must have dried up. If this succeeds, it'll open the floodgates. Every adult who appeared in films, TV shows, advertisements etc as a baby will be suing.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    This guy has been milking this as his claim to fame all his life. The ironic thing is that the cover is a very obvious statement about capitalism, and it turns out that the baby in the photo has spent his whole life chasing money.

    I'd say some lawyer knocked on his door and said, "I think we can make some money here with a paedophilia angle" and the guy jumped at the chance.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 807 ✭✭✭French Toast


    Hoping for a handy pay-day. Or else trying to make a minor celebrity of himself.


    Either way, move along.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,940 ✭✭✭✭Rothko


    He won't get a cent, and rightfully so.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Barmy. Remember seeing a thing from some loolaa one about breastfeeding being sexual abuse. These folk themselves are the ones sexualising everything. It's a niche outlook obviously, but that it's even an outlook at all...



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 959 ✭✭✭DarkJager21


    Absolutely, there's something mentally wrong with people who think like they do. They can go and **** their own kids up with their stupid ideas anyway, the rest of us will continue parenting as normal.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,122 ✭✭✭Trigger Happy


    Man who has courted publicity for all his adult life sues because said publicity is allegedly ruining his life.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,770 ✭✭✭Montage of Feck


    🙈🙉🙊



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,676 ✭✭✭AllGunsBlazing


    The album is about to mark its 30th anniversary so the timing is certainly suspect.


    Mind you, it's no skin off Kurt's nose, and considering he exited this world pretty much hating everything about what Nirvana had become he might actually find all of this hilarious.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,513 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    the reality of whether he enjoyed the attention before he may not now. There was meant to be a sticker covering his private parts which the record label didn't follow through with. They are also going to release the 30th anniversary album making a fortune for all those he is suing while he has his image plastered all over the place again. There was talk about it being inappropriate at the time which some people may be unaware of.

    Still a mediocre album given way more praise than it deserved



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,498 ✭✭✭ArnoldJRimmer




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,920 ✭✭✭buried


    Fantastic record company PR, just as AllGuns said up there, very handy as the record is about to mark its 30th anniversary.

    But sure why the f**k not, A Highly entertaining and enjoyable pop rock yoke is 'Nevermind'.

    Make America Get Out of Here



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,476 ✭✭✭Riddle101


    I don't necessarily agree with the lawsuit but I can see why it would be easy to sue over something like this. A picture of a naked baby on an album cover could be considered an indecent image. It wouldn't take much for a lawyer to make a case out of it I think.

    Seems like the photographer of the image has said that he thinks Spencer Elden should get something, so I reckon he probably has a chance of making something from it.

    My main issue on it is the topic of consent. The parents were the legal guardians at the time and if they gave consent for them to use it, then it's really on them, but of course, Spencer was too young to understand so you could argue he has a case. He didn't make any money off of it either so in a way, was kind've exploited. I'd say the surviving band members will settle it and give him what he asks for since they're rich and can probably take the hit. Hell, they'll probably sympathize with him.

    A cash grab, I know, but it's the world we live in now.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,465 ✭✭✭Anesthetize


    Looks like he's just fishing for a quick buck.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,026 ✭✭✭0ph0rce0




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,696 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    I saw this earlier and just rolled my eyes. As others have mentioned the fact the album turning thirty has nothing to do with it I’m sure. And also yes he has the album name never mind tattooed on his chest and has recreated the album cover as an adult so this is recent realisation it seems. Also, I love that a drummer who wasn’t on the album was included which just says, it was a Wikipedia job by the lawyer on the band. It seems he tried to get the surviving band members to come an art show of his and they didn’t respond to him. And yes as was mentioned if he has an issue take it up with his parents.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,043 ✭✭✭Wossack


    I’d say the lads in the advertising dept of Pampers are sh1tting themselves



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,282 ✭✭✭PsychoPete


    Every year he comes out with some nonsense like this



  • Posts: 25,611 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I wonder what the case will revolve around. Will they be trying to get people to take the stand to say that they are turned on by picture?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,527 ✭✭✭Hangdogroad


    Next up, the guy who was on the cover of U2s Boy sues 40 years later for being made to pose topless.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,684 ✭✭✭FatherTed


    He was fine with it a few years ago....

    Spencer Elden, 25, wanted to go au naturel when he made a splash to honor the legendary grunge band, he told The Post.

    “I said to the photographer, ‘Let’s do it naked.’ But he thought that would be weird, so I wore my swim shorts,” said Elden, an artist from LA.

    The album, released 25 years ago Saturday, includes songs like “Smells Like Teen Spirit” and “Come as You Are” and has sold more than 30 million copies worldwide.

    “The anniversary means something to me. It’s strange that I did this for five minutes when I was 4 months old and it became this really iconic image,” he said.

    “It’s cool but weird to be part of something so important that I don’t even remember,” said Elden, who prefers the punk band The Clash over Nirvana.

    Earlier this month, photographer John Chapple paid him $200 to do it again, he told The Post.

    Elden hopped in a lap pool at The Rose Bowl Aquatics Center in Pasadena to recreate the album cover image.

    Elden did the same thing 10 years ago, in honor of the album’s 15th anniversary.


    https://nypost.com/2016/09/23/nirvana-baby-recreates-iconic-album-cover-25-years-later/



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 316 ✭✭O'Neill




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,177 ✭✭✭Fandymo


    They will make a fortune because people want to listen to the music, not because of the picture on the front of the album.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 412 ✭✭bdmc16




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,198 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    If anyone exploited him it was his parents / guardians... who I imagine enabled the shoot and whatever compensation / royalties....



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,770 ✭✭✭Montage of Feck




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 962 ✭✭✭James 007


    Give him that dollar bill that he was trying to catch🙄



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,184 ✭✭✭riclad


    America has more lawyers than any other country, follow the money, he is sueing anyone who made money or were involved in releasing the album, once a child can speak they can say yes or no and maybe give permission, you do not need to be 18 to have human rights. The only reason most websites exist is because section 230 says you can sue the person who posts a comment or image not the website or forum social media service, that hosts the forum or platform. Celebrity's are constantly posting images of their young young children in order to get more views or clicks do they ask a 2 year old can I post images of you on my social media i doubt it



Advertisement