What baby from Nirvana’s album cover is doing now after losing lawsuit against band
The baby from the cover of Nirvana's famous album has changed a whole lot since featuring on the iconic record, as well as losing a lawsuit over the image.
In 1991 Nirvana released Nevermind, with the cover showing a naked infant underwater in a swimming pool, staring a dollar bill which was being dangled in front of him on a fishing hook.
As messages go, it sends a pretty clear message about innocence being corrupted by a capitalist system that leads it on with enticing promises, only to soon catch someone and leave them unable to escape.
The cover featured Spencer Elden, who was just four months old when the picture was taken, with him featuring because his parents were friends with the photographer, and were paid just £200, around £150, for the shoot, despite the massive success of the album.
Advert
Elden would even unsuccessfully sue the band over the image, accusing them of distributing 'child pornography' with the image.
He filed a lawsuit in 2021, claiming that his name and identity would be 'forever tied to the commercial sexual exploitation he experienced as a minor which has been distributed and sold worldwide'.
Unsurprisingly, given he was so young at the time, you probably wouldn’t recognise Elden if you saw him now.
Now in his 30s, he originally filed the lawsuit against both Nirvana and photographer Kirk Weddle, arguing that both his identity and name were ‘forever tied to the commercial sexual exploitation he experienced as a minor which has been distributed and sold worldwide’.
That was however, dismissed by US District Judge Fernando Olguin in 2022 as Elden had submitted it after the 10-year limit for filing a civil case.
This decision was overturned by an appeals court and the man was able to refile. However, the lawsuit still didn’t work out for him as a judge ruled in October this year that ‘neither the pose, focal point, setting, nor overall context suggest the album cover features sexually explicit conduct’.
Judge Olguin ruled that, beyond the fact that Elden was pictured as a naked baby, nothing came ‘close to bringing the image within the ambit of the child pornography statute’ and likened it to a family photo of a child bathing.
He also cited factors such as his parents being present for the photo shoot, Weddle being a friend and that Elden had previously ‘embraced and financially benefitted from being featured on the album cover’. Grohl even previously noted of him that ‘he’s got a Nevermind tattoo, I don’t’.
A lawyer for Nirvana said in response to the ruling: “We are delighted the court has ended this meritless case and freed our creative clients of the stigma of false allegations.”
Elden’s legal team however, said they ‘respectfully disagree’ with the decision, noting a plan to appeal.
James R Marsh, of the Marsh Law Firm, told Rolling Stone: “As long as the entertainment industry prioritises profits over childhood privacy, consent, and dignity, we will continue our pursuit for awareness and accountability.”
Jess Battison