Judge Permanently Dismisses Lawsuit Over Nirvana ‘Nevermind’ Cover Photo
The man photographed as a baby on Nirvana’s Nevermind album cover has lost his latest lawsuit against the band for distributing child sexual abuse imagery.
On Tuesday, a U.S. federal judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by Spencer Elden, who was photographed as a naked four-month-old swimming underwater for the cover of Nirvana’s iconic 1991 album. Elden claimed that the image amounted to child pornography.
U.S. District Judge Fernando M. Olguin formally closed the case, which was first filed four years ago. Elden’s lawsuit accused members of Nirvana, several record labels, and others associated with the band of violating federal child pornography laws. The one-page ruling dismissed Elden’s claims and barred him from refiling the case in federal court.
Elden’s lawsuit argued that Nirvana and their team had knowingly produced and profited from a nude photograph of him as a baby on the cover of Nevermind. It also alleged that the record labels and the estate of Kurt Cobain — the band’s late lead singer — continued to benefit from the image.
Elden first filed the lawsuit in 2021, saying his identity and name were “forever tied to the commercial sexual exploitation he experienced as a minor, which has been distributed and sold worldwide.” Judge Olguin dismissed that case in 2022, ruling it had been filed beyond the 10-year statute of limitations for civil claims. An appeals court later overturned that decision, allowing Elden to refile.
According to a report by the BBC, Judge Olguin has now ruled that aside from Elden’s nudity, nothing about the photograph “comes close to bringing the image within the ambit of the child pornography statute.” He compared the image to a “family photo of a child bathing” and said it was “plainly insufficient to support a finding” of child pornography.
“Nudity must be coupled with other circumstances that make the visual depiction lascivious or sexually provocative,” the judge writes.
Judge Olguin also noted several factors in his ruling, including that Elden’s parents were present at the photo shoot, that the photographer was a family friend, and that Elden had previously “embraced and financially benefitted from being featured on the album cover.”
However, Elden’s lawyer tells Rolling Stone that they “respectfully disagree” with the ruling and plan to appeal.
“As long as the entertainment industry prioritizes profits over childhood privacy, consent, and dignity, we will continue our pursuit for awareness and accountability,” James R Marsh, of the Marsh Law Firm, says in a statement to the music news outlet.
