Nirvana Wins Lawsuit Filed By Naked Baby On ‘Nevermind’ Album Cover

Nirvana has won a tribunal ruling dismissing a suit filed by the antheral who appeared arsenic a nude babe connected the screen of the band’s 1991 medium Nevermind.

Now successful his 30s, Spencer Elden claimed the photograph – 1 of the astir iconic medium covers successful stone past – violated national kid pornography laws by displaying a sexualized representation of a minor.

But a national justice ruled plainly connected Tuesday that it was “not kid pornography” – saying the famed representation did not adjacent travel adjacent to gathering the explanation of specified amerciable contented nether national law.

“Neither the pose, focal point, setting, nor wide discourse suggest the medium screen features sexually explicit conduct,” Judge Fernando M. Olguin wrote successful a ruling obtained and archetypal reported by Billboard. “This representation – an representation that is astir analogous to a household photograph of a nude kid bathing – is plainly insufficient to enactment a uncovering of [child pornography].”

Originally released Sept. 24, 1991, Nevermind reached the apical spot connected the Billboard 200 successful January 1992 and yet spent 554 weeks connected the chart. The legendary grunge medium has sold much than 30 cardinal copies and is wide considered 1 of the astir influential successful the past of stone music.

The album’s screen — a nude babe swimming successful a excavation chasing aft a dollar attached to a fishhook — was agelong interpreted arsenic an edgy critique of greed and capitalism. But successful a 2021 civilian lawsuit, Elden claimed it was thing other entirely: the benignant of “lascivious” show of a minor’s genitals that’s prohibited nether national kid pornography statutes.

“Spencer’s existent individuality and ineligible sanction are everlastingly tied to the commercialized intersexual exploitation helium experienced arsenic a minor,” his lawyers wrote astatine the time.

Legal experts expressed doubts astir the lawsuit erstwhile it was archetypal filed, saying the representation apt didn’t conscionable the circumstantial explanation of kid porn – and that Elden had seemed to repeatedly clasp the photograph and his relation successful stone past earlier helium decided to record a lawsuit.

In 2022, Judge Olguin dismissed the case for a simpler reason: That Elden had waited acold excessively agelong to record it successful court, violating the statute of limitations. But an appeals tribunal overturned that ruling a twelvemonth later, reviving the suit and sending it backmost to a proceedings justice for much litigation.

Two years later, the justice has present dismissed the lawsuit yet again – and this time, for much substantive reasons. Though helium acknowledged that a bare kid was intelligibly depicted successful the image, the justice said it was not the benignant of sexually-charged – the ineligible word is “lascivious” – photograph that would interruption the law.

“Nudity indispensable beryllium coupled with different circumstances that marque the ocular depiction lascivious oregon sexually provocative,” Judge Olguin wrote, quoting from an earlier ruling.

The justice besides questioned wherefore Elden had seemed to endorse the photograph galore times implicit the years. He cited instances wherever the antheral reenacted the photo, sold autographed memorabilia, and adjacent referred to himself arsenic the “Nirvana baby.”

“Plaintiff has, for galore ...