With over 30 million copies sold and containing Nirvana’s biggest hit “Smells Like Teen Spirit,” “Nevermind” is Nirvana’s most successful album. However, this album might be the reason why each member of the band might lose $150,000. Spencer Elden, mainly known as the “Nirvana Baby,” is all grown up and is now suing after deciding that he has an issue with the album cover.
Elden was portrayed as a naked child on the cover of Nirvana’s 1991 album, “Nevermind.” He has claimed the record’s iconic paintings is infant pornography and is suing the band over alleged “child sexual exploitation.” The sticker that was supposed to be placed on the album cover was eventually out of the picture due to his parents’ consent for the original album cover that they wanted to be displayed.
The thing that makes Elden’s decision to take legal action against Nirvana interesting is that rather than suing his parents, the ones who consented to the photo being published, he is suing the members. Kurt Cobain, the band’s frontman, died in 1994 and left his inheritance to his daughter, Frances Bean Cobain. Instead of suing Kurt Cobain, Elden is suing his child, who had no relations with the photograph. This case is most likely going to be dismissed due to him mentioning how he is tired of being associated with the picture. Weirdly enough, Elden has recreated the photo four times for the 10th, 17th, 20th, and 25th anniversary of the album and even has “Nevermind” tattooed on his chest.
Honestly, I am a little confused on why they are suing him for child pornography now when they did not do it before the album was released because most artists release the cover art prior to the album release. It is very shocking to me how this is all happening almost 30 years after the album was initially released. Elden’s management team should have found a way to make the cover art look appropriate for others to view. They could have also found another cover art photo that was relevant to what they wanted. I also believe whoever was responsible for picking that album cover should have thought twice because you have to be careful about what you post on social media. Everybody who was a part of deciding the album cover should have all talked about what they wanted to be displayed on the album cover before they jumped to conclusions.
Going from being proud of being on the cover to suing the band, so suddenly is very interesting to Elden, but no one will know how this case will go until it is over.
Jon • Oct 1, 2021 at 10:25 am
” I also believe whoever was responsible for picking that album cover should have thought twice because you have to be careful about what you post on social media.” While this is true, social media was not around in 1991, it didn’t become a thing until the mid 2000s. So it wasn’t really that big of a deal to be honest. There was no ill-will or malignant intentions that went into this album cover. This dude obviously just wants a payday. Maybe he had a drug problem or something? He should try rehab or getting a counselor. Nirvana and Frances don’t owe him a dime, and hasn’t she already gone thru enough shit? Jesus
Raven Franti • Sep 15, 2021 at 10:46 am
I believe legally that no photos could have been taken without the permission of the parents. That being said…the parents are responsible for the babys photo appearing on the cover…not Nirvana. Raven
Tamara Dame • Sep 15, 2021 at 7:08 am
I am sorry, but shouldn’t he be blaming his parents for allowing the picture to be taken!
Sarah • Sep 14, 2021 at 12:40 pm
Spencer has always said that he was uncomfortable about the album cover, including when he was recreating it. Victims are entitled to deal with their victimization however they see fit and within whatever time-frame suits them. Good to know that meteamedia is keen on victim-blaming. It’s 2021, not 1951. Time to grow up
Sarah • Sep 14, 2021 at 12:39 pm
Spencer has always said that he was uncomfortable about the album cover, including when he was recreating it. Victims are entitled to deal with their victimization however they see fit and within whatever time-frame suits them. Good to know that meteamedia is keen on victim-blaming. It’s 2021, not 1951.
Adam • Sep 14, 2021 at 5:44 am
I can’t imagine any world where you have to sue for half a million dollars to prove something is child pornography. I think courts would be particularly interested in knowing why there are are legal charges against those involved.
Michael Florentino • Sep 14, 2021 at 3:22 am
Hey, I listened to Nirvana for the first time in 1989, the year that their first album, Bleach, was released, and my interest in the band was immediately piqued, so it would naturally be safe to say that this is irksome. Mr Elden move on. Thanks.
Dalton Welch • Sep 12, 2021 at 6:01 pm
Honestly if he wouldn’t keep bringing it up I don’t think anyone would’ve cared, so I highly believe that it did not ruin his life be just Is exploiting the court system for money.