Spencer Elden — begrudgingly known to the world as the Nevermind Baby — has revived his lawsuit against Nirvana, continuing to allege that the artwork for 1991's Nevermind constitutes child pornography.
Elden filed a second amended complaint on Wednesday (January 12) after his original lawsuit was dismissed by a California federal judge when Elden's team failed to meet a December 30 deadline to respond to Nirvana's motion for dismissal. Elden has now met the January 13 deadline to adjust the suit.
The refiled suit claims that Nirvana, Kurt Cobain's estate, photographer Kurt Weddle, and a handful of record labels "intentionally commercially marketed the child pornography depicting Spencer and leveraged the lascivious nature of his image to promote the Nevermind album, the band, and Nirvana's music, while earning, at a minimum, tens of millions of dollars in the aggregate." However, the suit has removed a claim alleging that the defendants did "knowingly benefit from participation in what they know or should know is a sex trafficking venture."
Elden's first suit was filed in August of last year and claimed that Elden had suffered "lifelong damages" stemming from his depiction on the album cover and that 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."
Last year, Nirvana's lawyer filed a motion to dismiss in response, saying that Elden "has re-enacted the photograph in exchange for a fee, many times; he has had the album title Nevermind tattooed across his chest; he has appeared on a talk show wearing a self-parodying, nude-coloured onesie; he has autographed copies of the album cover for sale on eBay; and he has used the connection to try to pick up women." It was also argued that the statute of limitations on Elden's allegations had expired.
The saga continues.
Elden filed a second amended complaint on Wednesday (January 12) after his original lawsuit was dismissed by a California federal judge when Elden's team failed to meet a December 30 deadline to respond to Nirvana's motion for dismissal. Elden has now met the January 13 deadline to adjust the suit.
The refiled suit claims that Nirvana, Kurt Cobain's estate, photographer Kurt Weddle, and a handful of record labels "intentionally commercially marketed the child pornography depicting Spencer and leveraged the lascivious nature of his image to promote the Nevermind album, the band, and Nirvana's music, while earning, at a minimum, tens of millions of dollars in the aggregate." However, the suit has removed a claim alleging that the defendants did "knowingly benefit from participation in what they know or should know is a sex trafficking venture."
Elden's first suit was filed in August of last year and claimed that Elden had suffered "lifelong damages" stemming from his depiction on the album cover and that 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."
Last year, Nirvana's lawyer filed a motion to dismiss in response, saying that Elden "has re-enacted the photograph in exchange for a fee, many times; he has had the album title Nevermind tattooed across his chest; he has appeared on a talk show wearing a self-parodying, nude-coloured onesie; he has autographed copies of the album cover for sale on eBay; and he has used the connection to try to pick up women." It was also argued that the statute of limitations on Elden's allegations had expired.
The saga continues.
