Spencer Elden loses a legal file on baby’s photo on the album cover

The man who was photographed like a baby on the cover of the classic album of Nirvana, Nevermind, failed in his attempts to continue the group for having distributed juvenile pornography.

Spencer Elden, four months old, was photographed by swimming naked underwater on the famous cover of the 1991 LP.

He continued the rock group and photographer Kirk Weddle, but a judge ruled that “neither the pose, the focal point, the adjustment or the global context only suggest the cover of the album presents sexually explicit conduct”.

A lawyer from Nirvana said: “We are delighted that the court ended this case without merit and released our creative customers from the stigmatization of false allegations.”

Mr. Elden initially brought a legal action in 2021, arguing that his identity and name were “forever linked to the commercial sexual exploitation which he experienced as a minor which was distributed and sold in the world”.

US District Judge Fernando Olguin rejected it in 2022 because Mr. Elden submitted it after the limit of 10 years for the filing of a civil affair.

A Court of Appeal canceled this decision, allowing Mr. Elden to put the case.

However, judge Olguin has now judged that, beyond the fact that Mr. Elden was naked, nothing was “near the image within the framework of the status of juvenile pornography”.

He compared the image to a family photo of a bathing child, and said that she was “clearly insufficient to support an observation” of juvenile pornography.

“Nudity must be associated with other circumstances which make visual representation lascivious or sexually provocative,” wrote Olguin, citing a previous decision.

The judge also cited factors, including the presence of Mr. Elden’s parents during the photo shoot, the fact that the photographer was a friend, and the fact that he had previously “adopted and financially benefiting from the presentation of the album”.

Mr. Elden’s legal team told Rolling Stone that she “was respectfully disagreement” with the decision and planned to appeal.

“As long as the entertainment industry favors profits on privacy, consent and dignity of childhood, we will continue our quest for awareness and responsibility,” said James R Marsh of the law firm Marsh.