album covers

Spencer Elden has had his latest attempt at suing Nirvana over his claims of “sexual exploitation” dismissed in US District Court in Los Angeles. This is the third such time he’s attempted to sue the band, and this dismissal means there won’t be a fourth time. A previous claim was dismissed in January, as Elden’s legal team failed to file an opposition to a Nirvana estate request. A new deadline was set, the appropriate paperwork was seemingly submitted and it came before the court.

The case stems from the use of a photo of Elden shot in 1991, aged four months old, naked, swimming and used as the cover for Nirvana’s arguably iconic album, Nevermind. He claimed he was unable to give his permission at that time (being only 4 months old) and that it was “sexual exploitation” and “child pornography”. The judge disagreed.

The word “Nevermind” has been stuck in the planet’s collective consciousness ever since Nirvana released their album of that title in 1991. But now it’s a word (technically two) that the infant subject on its cover, Spencer Elden, now 30, is going to be saying even more now when people ask him “So, how’d that lawsuit go against Nirvana?”.

He sued the band last year, alleging “sexual exploitation” and that the cover artwork constituted “child sexual abuse”. The band’s estate responded that Elden had “spent three decades profiting from his celebrity as the self-anointed ‘Nirvana Baby.’”, having recreated the album photograph a number of times, appeared on talk shows, and autographed copies of the album to sell on eBay. The judge seemed to agree with this argument.

The cover of Nirvana’s Nevermind album is as iconic as the album itself. But Spencer Elden, the baby in the image, is now a 30-year-old man who realized he’s not happy with his photo on the album cover. So, he decided to sue the band members and other folks related to Nirvana, alleging “child pornography.”