It came after Elden’s legal team failed to meet a deadline to file an opposition to the Nirvana estate’s request to dismiss the suit.Ī number of legal experts had previously said they believed the case was likely to be dismissed. The lawsuit alleged Elden’s guardians never signed a release authorising the commercial use of the image in question, that the defendants had “violated” federal child pornography statutes, and that Elden sustained “injuries” and “lifelong damages” as a result.īack in January, a judge rejected the case “with leave to amend” in a US District Court in Central California. They also cited occasions where he’d seemingly embraced being featured on the artwork, claiming that Elden had “spent three decades profiting from his celebrity as the self-anointed ‘Nirvana Baby'”.
In a previous statement, representatives for Nirvana rejected the idea that Elden had only discovered he was the baby on the ‘Nevermind’ cover within the last decade. Mabie added: “The ‘Nevermind’ cover was created at time when Spencer was a baby and it is impossible for him to age out of this victimisation while his image remains in distribution.”
0 kommentar(er)
