‘Nevermind' album cover lawsuit dismissed

Published January 5, 2022, 11:44 AM

by Punch Liwanag

Grown-up baby on Nirvana’s iconic album cover for “Nevermind” “failed to respond to a motion to dismiss.”

This was the reason given by a judge who recently junked the case as filed by Spencer Elden, the baby depicted on the cover.

Supposedly, Elden’s legal team missed the December 30 deadline given by the court.

Elden however, will have another shot.

“Per the ruling, Elden will have one more chance to issue a second amended complaint with a new deadline of January 13, if he doesn’t the suit will be dismissed without prejudice (which means another suit could be filed in the future),” Rolling Stone reported.

Elden’s attorney’s said “we will be filing a Second Amended Complaint very soon. We are confident that Spencer will be allowed to move forward with the case.”

The original case stated that the defendants “knowingly produced, possessed, and advertised commercial child pornography,” and that they “failed to take reasonable steps to protect Spencer and prevent his widespread sexual exploitation,” adding that Elden has “suffered and will continue to suffer lifelong damages.”

The defendants in the case, which includes Nirvana, Kurt Cobain’s estate and photographer Kurt Weddle and record labels, and their lawyers noted the 30-year old Elden’s “frequent willingness to associate himself with the “Nevermind” cover, recreating the photograph in exchange for money, getting the album title tattooed on his chest, selling autographed copies of the album on eBay, and allegedly using the connection to flirt with women.”

But their main argument for the motion to dismiss was that “the statute of limitations were up.”

Lawyers from Nirvana wrote, “Elden’s claims fail, at the outset, because they are time-barred. Elden asserts two causes of action, one under the federal statute that permits victims of certain federal child pornography criminal offenses to sue for civil damages; and another under the federal statute that permits victims of certain trafficking crimes to sue for civil damages. Neither cause of action is timely.”

 
CLICK HERE TO SIGN-UP
 

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

["celebrities","entertainment","entertainment-news","music","overseas","entertainment"]
[2902259,3003324,3003320,3003265,3003094,3003099,3003080]