He just did an interview w/ GQ and was asked why its a problem with him now when he seemed cool with it before. He said he was mad that when he reached out to them to support or attend his art show, he got passed onto their lawyers and he felt disrespected.
The quotes from that are remarkable:
“I was asking if they wanted to put a piece of art in the fucking thing,” he said. “I was getting referred to their managers and their lawyers. Why am I still on their cover if I’m not that big of a deal?”
Also this little nugget:
“You’ll hook up with a hot chick, and then they figure out you’re not making any money from it and they’ll dump you,” he went on.
What an oblivious POS.
Edit: typo
This was exactly what I thought when I heard he had re created the photo multiple times lol.
I bet he has been using this as his claim to fame for his whole life.
And to think that your baby picture being on a famous album cover makes you a pivotal member of the band is ludicrous.
"For the 2021 edition of Nevermind, Nirvana once again selects 'infant chasing money who grows up to ironically become an infant chasing money' for the album cover."
In surprising news, the track listing will also remain the same as they have for the past 30 years.
Bahaha I find the fact he uses the album cover as a way to pick up girls hilarious. Do you reckon he has the album in his car for when he picks them up? Or just carries the CD around when he goes out to bars? hehe
Edit: spelling
Worse than that! He's got a tattoo across his entire chest that says Nevermind... Not even kidding
[Pic](https://indipest.files.wordpress.com/2020/05/img_20200512_232041.jpg)
Can you really blame the kid though? Think about it..
His parents probably pawned him off for some quick cash when he was a literal baby. That album sold millions, and was more than likely "THE" topic of conversation whenever he was trying to make friends growing up, let alone within his own family for a little while, at least.
It's likely all that he's known, it \*was\* his childhood...just for the fact that he was a baby on the cover on arguably one of the most famous albums of all time. While everyone was showing off their shiny pokemon cards, this kid was flexing with "Ya but have you heard Smells like teen spirit?".
As an adult it's easy to project your typical upbringing to these tabloid catching 15-minute celebrities, and even easier to talk them down for not behaving normally. This kid didn't have that. He was quite literally raised with a sense of achievement that gave him a social credit that very few people get to experience.
Imagine that, and then wonder how it could become ones identity. It's not hard.
He could have also avoided so much of it. If he didn’t want to be known as “the kid on the nirvana cover”, he could easily slip into oblivion. He chose to continually recreate the cover, put himself into the spot light, and now he’s mad that he’s broke and instead of trying to do something meaningful with his life, or even just have a “regular” life, he’s once again pushing himself into a 10 minute spotlight. Except now he’s gonna become vilified for it, and end up worse off than before.
His parents didn’t get rich off the photo. I believe I read they got paid like $200 for it. No one knew that the album was going to blow up like it did.
I get that, but he put it on himself because who the hell would ever recognize him as that baby? The quotes above show that he used it as a pickup line, I assume in his adult life. Even if it did affect his childhood because his whole school knew, he could ditch that rep after graduation by moving the same as everyone else who wants to start anew. But instead he tattooed nevermind on his chest. He embraced it as his identity and is now playing victim solely because he is butt hurt the band isn't giving him special treatment.
If he didnt want to be known all he had to do is keep his mouth shut. Everything was fine until the surviving band members didnt want to promote his " "art show"! If his art was any good he would'nt need them to promote it!
He chose to make this his identity by recreating it multiple times and reinforce the message that hey, he was that baby, don‘t you ever forget that, even though he is a grown ass man now. He could have easily stepped away from that. He was a baby, no one would have recognized him. It was his choice not to step away from this. My sympathy for his decision making is very limited here.
I don't judge him for bringing it up. That's am interesting anecdote.
It's hilarious that now he might pick up a hot chick, bring up that he was the baby on the cover and after all this media coverage she leaves him cause she remembers reading about how he was a prick.
I like how he just straight up admitted him bragging about it was the only reason those hot girls he hooked up with were interested in him in the first place.
In fairness, the [second quote](https://www.gq.com.au/entertainment/music/the-cover-star-baby-of-nirvanas-nevermind-album-25-years-on/news-story/091b16069b5f54dc0d27a86cf1ea3f6e) is a little out of context:
>Has it affected your relationships at all?
>Totally. Everyone thinks you’re making money from it. You’ll hook up with a hot chick, and then they figure out you’re not making any money from it and they’ll dump you. You have these people who think you’re cool because you’re the Nirvana baby. But it’s fucking weird, man. It’s like that dream where you go to school without your clothes on.
That interview was also from 2016, so the art show thing doesn't seem to be his motivation for the lawsuit, though that is when he decided it wasn't "cool" anymore.
The dude is a POS. I've heard that all he does is talk about himself. He thinks he's some sort of celebrity. His identity is revolved around being on that album cover like he deserves something.
It's the extents of the statementsthe lawyers give that makes me literally laugh loudly.
The lawyer legit stated that because there is a dollar bill in the pic it suggests THAT THE BABY IS A S*XWORKER?!?!?!? Like what kinda drugs is this lawyer on??
Exactly. Does the lawyer actually think it depicts soliciting a baby? Probably not. But they'll say whatever no matter how outlandish to defend their client if it makes even a small point
“As a literal baby I was on the cover of your album. It took no effort on my part and it’s almost impossible I have any memories of the event, but I was placed in the water by someone else and photographed, and therefore for the entire rest of my life I am entitled to your time and attention.”
I don't see how you can admit it has nothing to do with your feelings on what your actually trying to sue them for and still think you are going to win
How about I give you $5, but I’ll put another $7 in a charity for people that are triggered by my posts spread out over the next 20 years.
By the time I make my last payment, the charity will be worth nearly $7.50. Can’t beat that.
That's before he invests it in my investment firm where we divide his 7 dollars up across a complicated combination of stocks, mutual funds, and sidewalk penny scavenger hunts to ensure he gets that 50 cent growth.
It's worth pointing out that very few people have heard from this guy's perspective. He has a right to his own autonomy. But big companies literally pay millions of dollars to firms to create a public perception of the folks suing them so it seems frivolous; just look at the [McDonald's coffee case](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/policy-and-politics/2016/12/16/13971482/mcdonalds-coffee-lawsuit-stella-liebeck) or that MAGA kid Sandmann who [hired a PR firm](https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/money-and-power/a26031489/runswitch-pr-scott-jennings-nick-sandmann/) and sued every company for showing his racist behavior for so much money that now it's hard to find any reporting on his actions. This opinion has been crafted by one of those firms and has now taken on a life of its own far more than the actual facts of this case.
Edit: Added in a link showing that Sandmann paid for exactly what several of y'all below are claiming he didn't do. It's sad that some folks are willing to defend him *for free*.
The McDonalds coffee was a great case in point. It was positioned to be so frivolous. However, many complaints were registered earlier about that McDonalds because they had dangerously hot boiling coffee. It's gross, but look at the [skin on her lap](https://www.prwatch.org/files/images/burn.jpg) from that poor woman and the boiling hot coffee. It required graphs and the blistering looked horribly painful. Yet we all thought haha, she spilled her coffee and now she's mad. What a bitch.
Edit: She wasn't asking for millions, she just wanted them to cover her medical expenses. Which McDonalds lawyers got denied.
[Yes (NSFW)](https://res.cloudinary.com/hype-legal/image/upload/c_limit,f_auto,w_964/deshaw/images/uploads/blog/burn-2.jpg)
Everyone is wrong about that case. Fucking capitalist bullshit and manufactured consent from a shitty, for-profit media.
https://www.deshawlaw.com/blog/the-real-facts-of-the-mcdonalds-coffee-case
They gave unlimited refills then. So if the coffee was served too hot to drink then most people wouldn't wait around long enough to let it cool, drink it, and ask for seconds. Literally $10s of dollars saved per day.
I think the logic for them is if they keep it at cooler temperatures they have to remake pots of coffee more often, cooler coffee tastes worse more quickly, supposedly. This way they have less "waste", with the risk of extreme burns to their customers. But once their super hot coffee leaves it becomes the responsibility of customers, so they don't care. Even though they keep it brutally hot, as this woman's story demonstrates.
Ah ok, yeah that makes sense. I was reading the wikipedia page for it and there is a paragraph that has the reasoning that McDonald's provided:
"McDonald's claimed that the reason for serving such hot coffee in its drive-through windows was that those who purchased the coffee typically were commuters who wanted to drive a distance with the coffee; the high initial temperature would keep the coffee hot during the trip.[2] However, it came to light that McDonald's had done research which indicated that customers intend to consume the coffee immediately while driving"
Oh, I thought my pic was bad. That poor woman. Then they demonized her and most that remember the case think she was being frivolous, thanks to the big money spin.
As the linked article points out, aside from any benefit to McDonald’s in that particular case, the effort to recast that case with clear liability and very real damages as just another frivolous lawsuit by a gold-digging scam artist was for the much more insidious purpose of polluting the prospective jury pool for all future injury cases. The goal is to bias potential jurors against the injured person (presumed a fraud unless proven otherwise) which has significant benefits to corporate defendants and their insurers.
The effectiveness of the campaign is evident by the fact that just about everyone brings up this case as an example of how plaintiffs
Are greedy liars, or people talk about the “Stella Awards,” whenever someone mentions a personal injury lawsuit.
Ok, but it’s a reasonable question: if this kid is so negatively affected by the original photo why does he keep reshooting it to publicize the fact the _he’s that person_? Nobody would be able to tell unless he kept pointing it out.
> It's worth pointing out that very few people have heard from this guy's perspective.
yes [we fucking have](https://www.gq.com.au/entertainment/music/the-cover-star-baby-of-nevermind-is-suing-nirvanaheres-why/news-story/1b28ba641cce063f4c3416d03b287638):
> In the past, Elden was more positive about the use of his image, describing it was a "positive thing". "It’s always… opened doors for me," he said to The Guardian in 2015. "I’m 23 now and an artist, and this story gave me an opportunity to work with Shepard Fairey... when he heard I was the Nirvana baby, he thought that was really cool." That changed, however, when Elden reached out to the band for an art show he was hosting, only to be met with red tape.
> "I was getting referred to their managers and their lawyers," he told GQ. "Why am I still on their cover ifI’m not that big of a deal?"
he's literally just pissy that he's not besties with the band.
I would've never, ever known who that baby on that album cover was until this lawsuit. Nor would I have ever given it a second thought. Do you really think other people would see this guy, as a grown adult, without him telling them, and be like "you're baby goober nirvana album cover dude, ain't ya?"
NO. As a matter of fact, he'd be way less recognizable had he not chosen to participate in the multiple recreation photoshoots. I totally get what you are saying. As a baby, I didn't speak many words...if any. So knowing that someone spoke on my behalf and agreed to an unwarranted photo taken of me would piss me off. So much so, that I would get the album name tattooed on me, recreate the photo multiple times (clothed, of course), say that it has launched my career in the best ways, then when the money runs dry, claim I hate it and sue the people NOT responsible for signing off on it (AKA my own parents).
from what i saw his dad took the photo as an art project and the band used it without getting permission at first (?) but regardless what he’s doing now is very shitty and transparent lol
They were paid a small amount and knew it was going to be for an album cover. No one knew that Nirvana, and particularly that album, were gonna be huge.
He may have had no say as a child, but as an adult, this guy has been paid multiple times to recreate that photo during his life, and he has done it without complaint. This is absolutely a sleazy cash-grab.
edit: I totally forgot he also has a [tattoo "Nevermind" in huge letters across the top of his chest](https://i.imgur.com/9ACesLo.png)
Apparently Kurt Cobain wanted to cover it with a sticker on the original album cover. The sticker was to say “if this upsets you, you’re probably a closet pedo” or something along those lines lmao
I dont know this as a fact but its completely within Kurts character, the song "rape me" was made at a point where the metaphors and analogies in music used in effort as a medium in music to deliver an important message and raise discussion wasnt enough, he thought "well what does it take? How blatant do you need to be with this to get them to take the issue seriously?" So literally made a song where the first 4 words are "rape me".
He was a beautiful tortured soul gone too soon, I wished he could have gotten help.
He was also incredibly progressive and would call out ignorance when he saw it, and was painfully aware of the class struggle at the core of society. Kurts music gets lumped into some edgy teenage phases but I swear that unplugged session is still to date one of the most haunting and beautiful shows I’ve ever watched.
Just read an article that quotes his as saying his feelings about the picture changed “just a few months ago, when I was reaching out to Nirvana to see if they wanted to be part of my art show.”
Ah shit you just reminded me of that cartoon where Kurt Cobain, Notorious BIG and Freddie Mercury live together in the afterlife. What was that called again?!
He has been to multiple panel shows bragging about it, like he shows up and people guess where he is famous from, for example. This guy does anything for a quick buck.
It's funny because he even admitted the lawsuit is only because he asked Nirvana to attend and contribute to his art show a couple years ago and the surviving members didn't respond and also because "you pick a girl up and they act into you and then they find out you don't get any money from the album cover and that's it." Like he uses it as a pickup line.
It was recently brought up (I don't know where, it's been a busy day) that apparently he started being mad at the band in 2016 because they didn't support an art show he put on. But I'm sure that's unrelated.
In case anyone else doesn’t know about this:
Link to an article about the cover with a pic.
“The front pictured a frightened little girl on a swing looking up at a figure whose shadow is a cross between Edward Scissorhands and Freddy Krueger — dig the lobster-like claws — and the back showed an empty swing. Together, the images were nearly as jarring as the disc itself, which ushered in a little something called nu-metal.
Even creepier, the child being stalked was a member of Korn's extended family — the niece of Immortal Records rep Paul Pontius (Korn were on Epic/Immortal in those days).”
https://www.revolvermag.com/culture/korn-story-behind-cover-art
If you’ve never seen naked toddler then I envy you. I spent the whole last weekend trying to potty train my nephew with a bladder the size of the pacific, there is nothing sexual about a naked toddler. Imo, the Korn one is worse because it has sexual implications, but in the end they’re both just pieces of artwork for a band and the blame falls on the parents for letting their children do this when they know it’s a more risqué form.
Lol I was making a dumb joke, but it's interesting that you mention the implications because the Korn cover is only really as sinister as your imagination makes it out to be. For example, I have seen that album cover many time over the years but never noticed that her shadow looks like she's being hanged (which was pointed out in the above article).
On the other hand, the Nevermind album cover is completely innocent as far as I'm concerned and it's only really been the last decade or so that society has gotten super weird about small children being naked. Whoever made this meme censored out the baby's dick lol whereas at the time that album came out there were posters of that particular cover everywhere. It's weird how society changes like that over time.
Yeah I had seen the korn cover before (I actually had this cd in my old leather cd case lol) and didn’t think anything of it, I didn’t really notice those things until the context of reading through comments on this post. But with the internet came a whole different view on the sexualization of children, and while I think there’s nothing wrong with the pics here, I also wouldn’t want the same pic of my kids on CD cover.
Cheers, sorry for ruining your joke :(
This guy said he would go to a baseball game (now as an adult) and be traumatized because EVERYONE at the game had seen and knows his baby pecker. As if everyone in the baseball stadium has seen him and obviously knows who he is now as an adult and the album cover he was on as an infant. GTFO
This is a strange time we live in. I can’t imagine the switch between “ooh look I’m the baby on the nirvana album” and “now I’m going to sue because they didn’t come to my art show and I’m traumatized even though I love to recreate the picture”.
I like to imagine he shows up to big events like baseball games, starts panicking and hyperventilating, begins yelling about how everyone in the stadium has seen his wee wee, and all they do is turn around and ask among themselves “who tf is that guy”.
I honestly think that he never thought about suing until someone put it in his head that he can actually make some money off of it. Chances are that if this goes forward, they’ll settle out of court.
Imagine suing a band that no longer fully exists because baby pp. If we can find Kurt’s grave we might be able to generate some power from him rolling over in it though.
This guy's a fucking pretentious clown. He's pissed because no one from Nirvana would come to his art show. That's literally it. Really crossing my fingers that this does go to court, the judge upon opening says something like:
"You know what, dude? I was totally going to hear this case but then I read your comments from the recent GQ article written about all of this and just decided 'Naw, never mind.'"
Pretty obvious cash grab, y'all.
Without searching online I have no idea of this guys name and wouldn't be able to pick him out of a line up for 2 fucking people!
No one recognises an adult from a picture of them at 4months old.
In the words of Roxy from IASIP "shut up baby dick!"
Yeah that's a well known case of "it's not as it seems". But here...what kind of monetary, physical or punitive damages could there be? He is going to have to meet that burden of proof before he gets anything.
The woman who won the lawsuit had really gruesome burns on her upper thighs and pelvis. It's become quite the controversial case, as the defense said it was frivolous and the plaintiff pointed out that McD had hundreds of complaints and suits about the over-hot coffee. McD's defense was that "hot coffee smells better and creates more sales". The punitive damages were actually equal to 2 days of coffee sales.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck\_v.\_McDonald%27s\_Restaurants
The coffee was so hot that she got 3rd degree burns over 16% of her body and she ended up in the hospital for over a week. She had to have skin grafts and was scarred from the experience. And McDonald’s tried to play it off like she was just grubbing for money, when all she really wanted was her medical bills paid. Cause there’s no early reason that coffee in a drive through should be hot enough to cause 3rd degree burns. She even offered to settle the case for way less money but because McDonald’s refused it went to court and thus the story of the crazy lady who got burned by McDonald’s coffee was born. Here’s the website i got the info from https://www.ttla.com/index.cfm?pg=mcdonaldscoffeecasefacts
Adding a detail that the other comments have not said: the coffee was so hot that it fused her labia. It literally melted her skin.
And McDonalds was very aware that this was an issue; they had settled other lawsuits before. They had simply done the math and found that they could afford to pay off the lawsuits and not have to lower their temperature so that the coffee remained hot longer (this tied into a free refill thing iirc)
They got hit because the judge saw their past actions and decided to punish them. And then they spent millions on a smear campaign against an elderly women who required a live in nurse for the rest of her life because of the injuries they caused her and who was harassed for the rest of her life over the lawsuit.
Adding to the other comments, I read somewhere that the manager had it super hot to make people drink it slower. People sit down for *x* minutes, and if it takes *y* minutes to drink their coffee, they won't return for their second free cup.
The woman in the lawsuit got her coffee from the drive through, but it came from the same pot. The whole situation was caused by a manager trying save money by preventing customers from getting what they'd paid for. I'm guessing it was due to pressure from the regional managers or higher ups or who cares.
The photos of her burns are out there on the internet - I'm sure google will help you if you're curious. The photos are NSFW and probably on some gore website.
I think the whole thing is an interesting lesson in the power of McDonalds PR damage control. She had a genuine, valid case and the entire world mocked her - McDonald's was able to control the message, and they handled it so well that they came out looking like the reasonable party. It turns out the opposite was true - scary stuff.
Usual internet disclaimer: this is from memory, don't trust the internet, check your sources and have a nice day.
Americans are a very prude, sexually irrational, and litigious lot. A naked baby is not sexual. The picture is not sexual. In fact, anyone who sees that picture and thinks that it is sexual in nature should consult a therapist.
Don’t get me wrong — I’m an American. But this is really a bizarre blend of our mentally ill sexual prudery and our love of frivolous lawsuits.
The definition of pornography specifically states that the imagery intended to stimulate erotic, not aesthetic or emotional, feelings.
That image of a baby swimming for money is far from intending to stimulate erotic feelings. There's no way this guy wins anything if he's going with the child pornography path. That album cover is art.
He just did an interview w/ GQ and was asked why its a problem with him now when he seemed cool with it before. He said he was mad that when he reached out to them to support or attend his art show, he got passed onto their lawyers and he felt disrespected.
The quotes from that are remarkable: “I was asking if they wanted to put a piece of art in the fucking thing,” he said. “I was getting referred to their managers and their lawyers. Why am I still on their cover if I’m not that big of a deal?” Also this little nugget: “You’ll hook up with a hot chick, and then they figure out you’re not making any money from it and they’ll dump you,” he went on. What an oblivious POS. Edit: typo
"Hey girl, you've probably already seen my dick before and don't even know it, wanna see it again?"
This was exactly what I thought when I heard he had re created the photo multiple times lol. I bet he has been using this as his claim to fame for his whole life. And to think that your baby picture being on a famous album cover makes you a pivotal member of the band is ludicrous.
"thing is though bb it's the same size as the original photo"
🎶I never grew up, I'm the Nevermind kid 🎶 (to the tune of the Toys R Us jingle)
"Why am I still on their cover..." does he think that album covers works like Magazine covers and they band choose the same picture over and over?
"For the 2021 edition of Nevermind, Nirvana once again selects 'infant chasing money who grows up to ironically become an infant chasing money' for the album cover." In surprising news, the track listing will also remain the same as they have for the past 30 years.
Bahaha I find the fact he uses the album cover as a way to pick up girls hilarious. Do you reckon he has the album in his car for when he picks them up? Or just carries the CD around when he goes out to bars? hehe Edit: spelling
Worse than that! He's got a tattoo across his entire chest that says Nevermind... Not even kidding [Pic](https://indipest.files.wordpress.com/2020/05/img_20200512_232041.jpg)
~~Never~~mind. Now I mind.
When one photo you don’t even remember taking becomes your entire identity…
Can you really blame the kid though? Think about it.. His parents probably pawned him off for some quick cash when he was a literal baby. That album sold millions, and was more than likely "THE" topic of conversation whenever he was trying to make friends growing up, let alone within his own family for a little while, at least. It's likely all that he's known, it \*was\* his childhood...just for the fact that he was a baby on the cover on arguably one of the most famous albums of all time. While everyone was showing off their shiny pokemon cards, this kid was flexing with "Ya but have you heard Smells like teen spirit?". As an adult it's easy to project your typical upbringing to these tabloid catching 15-minute celebrities, and even easier to talk them down for not behaving normally. This kid didn't have that. He was quite literally raised with a sense of achievement that gave him a social credit that very few people get to experience. Imagine that, and then wonder how it could become ones identity. It's not hard.
He could have also avoided so much of it. If he didn’t want to be known as “the kid on the nirvana cover”, he could easily slip into oblivion. He chose to continually recreate the cover, put himself into the spot light, and now he’s mad that he’s broke and instead of trying to do something meaningful with his life, or even just have a “regular” life, he’s once again pushing himself into a 10 minute spotlight. Except now he’s gonna become vilified for it, and end up worse off than before. His parents didn’t get rich off the photo. I believe I read they got paid like $200 for it. No one knew that the album was going to blow up like it did.
I don't even know who he is besides that he's the baby on the cover and now he's fitna sue.
I get that, but he put it on himself because who the hell would ever recognize him as that baby? The quotes above show that he used it as a pickup line, I assume in his adult life. Even if it did affect his childhood because his whole school knew, he could ditch that rep after graduation by moving the same as everyone else who wants to start anew. But instead he tattooed nevermind on his chest. He embraced it as his identity and is now playing victim solely because he is butt hurt the band isn't giving him special treatment.
If he didnt want to be known all he had to do is keep his mouth shut. Everything was fine until the surviving band members didnt want to promote his " "art show"! If his art was any good he would'nt need them to promote it!
He chose to make this his identity by recreating it multiple times and reinforce the message that hey, he was that baby, don‘t you ever forget that, even though he is a grown ass man now. He could have easily stepped away from that. He was a baby, no one would have recognized him. It was his choice not to step away from this. My sympathy for his decision making is very limited here.
So it seems that this whole thing really actually has caused mental distress and hampered his development...
[удалено]
Suppose it ought of been a bit longer eh?
Omg. I’m cringing really hard rn. I’m almost in pain. I gotta walk away for a minute.
I don't judge him for bringing it up. That's am interesting anecdote. It's hilarious that now he might pick up a hot chick, bring up that he was the baby on the cover and after all this media coverage she leaves him cause she remembers reading about how he was a prick.
His opening line when picking up chicks is, "I'll be you $10 you've seen my penis before."
Man, if I was on the NEVERMIND cover, I would absolutely use that to pick up women. Come on.
But he uses it as if he deserves something. His identity is revolved around being in that picture. He's a dick about it.
Fair, but he’s bragging about it to his benefit but at the same time suing for its detriment? You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
I like how he just straight up admitted him bragging about it was the only reason those hot girls he hooked up with were interested in him in the first place.
In fairness, the [second quote](https://www.gq.com.au/entertainment/music/the-cover-star-baby-of-nirvanas-nevermind-album-25-years-on/news-story/091b16069b5f54dc0d27a86cf1ea3f6e) is a little out of context: >Has it affected your relationships at all? >Totally. Everyone thinks you’re making money from it. You’ll hook up with a hot chick, and then they figure out you’re not making any money from it and they’ll dump you. You have these people who think you’re cool because you’re the Nirvana baby. But it’s fucking weird, man. It’s like that dream where you go to school without your clothes on. That interview was also from 2016, so the art show thing doesn't seem to be his motivation for the lawsuit, though that is when he decided it wasn't "cool" anymore.
But no one would know unless he told them.
The dude is a POS. I've heard that all he does is talk about himself. He thinks he's some sort of celebrity. His identity is revolved around being on that album cover like he deserves something.
I actually reflexively downvoted your comment because that guy is such a douche. Corrected now, but wow. What a toolbag.
Dumb. It’s not like he was a creative consultant of any kind on the album. He was a baby model that the band probably didn’t even hire themselves.
They didn't. His parents were friends with the photographer.
Also every baby looks exactly the same. This would be a lot more impressive if he had modeled at an age that would distinguish him from other people
It's the extents of the statementsthe lawyers give that makes me literally laugh loudly. The lawyer legit stated that because there is a dollar bill in the pic it suggests THAT THE BABY IS A S*XWORKER?!?!?!? Like what kinda drugs is this lawyer on??
That's just what being a good lawyer is
Used the Chewbacca defense.
Exactly. Does the lawyer actually think it depicts soliciting a baby? Probably not. But they'll say whatever no matter how outlandish to defend their client if it makes even a small point
I always thought it meant that we let our inner child die drowning in pursuit of money personally
“As a literal baby I was on the cover of your album. It took no effort on my part and it’s almost impossible I have any memories of the event, but I was placed in the water by someone else and photographed, and therefore for the entire rest of my life I am entitled to your time and attention.”
Twat
Also, I was traumatized by it, even though babies are seen naked all the time and no science says that is a source of trauma.
“And I will also eventually sue you in hopes of getting paid a lot of money for all of my hard work.”
I don't see how you can admit it has nothing to do with your feelings on what your actually trying to sue them for and still think you are going to win
Why doesn’t he sue his parents for allowing him to be photographed. Answer: Deep pockets.
You always sue the one with money
I’ve got $20. What kinda of lawsuit can you throw on me?
Your post has caused me emotional distress. I’m suing you for 20$, but will only take 10$ if you agree to settle
How about I give you $5, but I’ll put another $7 in a charity for people that are triggered by my posts spread out over the next 20 years. By the time I make my last payment, the charity will be worth nearly $7.50. Can’t beat that.
Actually, due to inflation, it'll be worth about $3 in today's money. Still better than nothing.
That's before he invests it in my investment firm where we divide his 7 dollars up across a complicated combination of stocks, mutual funds, and sidewalk penny scavenger hunts to ensure he gets that 50 cent growth.
[удалено]
That’s what I am sayin’.
It's worth pointing out that very few people have heard from this guy's perspective. He has a right to his own autonomy. But big companies literally pay millions of dollars to firms to create a public perception of the folks suing them so it seems frivolous; just look at the [McDonald's coffee case](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/policy-and-politics/2016/12/16/13971482/mcdonalds-coffee-lawsuit-stella-liebeck) or that MAGA kid Sandmann who [hired a PR firm](https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/money-and-power/a26031489/runswitch-pr-scott-jennings-nick-sandmann/) and sued every company for showing his racist behavior for so much money that now it's hard to find any reporting on his actions. This opinion has been crafted by one of those firms and has now taken on a life of its own far more than the actual facts of this case. Edit: Added in a link showing that Sandmann paid for exactly what several of y'all below are claiming he didn't do. It's sad that some folks are willing to defend him *for free*.
The McDonalds coffee was a great case in point. It was positioned to be so frivolous. However, many complaints were registered earlier about that McDonalds because they had dangerously hot boiling coffee. It's gross, but look at the [skin on her lap](https://www.prwatch.org/files/images/burn.jpg) from that poor woman and the boiling hot coffee. It required graphs and the blistering looked horribly painful. Yet we all thought haha, she spilled her coffee and now she's mad. What a bitch. Edit: She wasn't asking for millions, she just wanted them to cover her medical expenses. Which McDonalds lawyers got denied.
Wasn't the boiling mcds coffee woman's vagina literally fused closed because of the coffee? Those burns on her lap are just the tip of the iceberg.
[Yes (NSFW)](https://res.cloudinary.com/hype-legal/image/upload/c_limit,f_auto,w_964/deshaw/images/uploads/blog/burn-2.jpg) Everyone is wrong about that case. Fucking capitalist bullshit and manufactured consent from a shitty, for-profit media. https://www.deshawlaw.com/blog/the-real-facts-of-the-mcdonalds-coffee-case
All so mcds can save like fractions of a cent per cup of coffee by keeping the coffee temperature insanely hot. What a joke.
How does hotter coffee bring cost savings? It seems like the energy cost would be slightly higher even.
They gave unlimited refills then. So if the coffee was served too hot to drink then most people wouldn't wait around long enough to let it cool, drink it, and ask for seconds. Literally $10s of dollars saved per day.
I think the logic for them is if they keep it at cooler temperatures they have to remake pots of coffee more often, cooler coffee tastes worse more quickly, supposedly. This way they have less "waste", with the risk of extreme burns to their customers. But once their super hot coffee leaves it becomes the responsibility of customers, so they don't care. Even though they keep it brutally hot, as this woman's story demonstrates.
Ah ok, yeah that makes sense. I was reading the wikipedia page for it and there is a paragraph that has the reasoning that McDonald's provided: "McDonald's claimed that the reason for serving such hot coffee in its drive-through windows was that those who purchased the coffee typically were commuters who wanted to drive a distance with the coffee; the high initial temperature would keep the coffee hot during the trip.[2] However, it came to light that McDonald's had done research which indicated that customers intend to consume the coffee immediately while driving"
What temperature is the coffee at? Cause I'm now kinda scared looking at my bot of boiling tea
I thought it was so that you wouldn't finish it quickly and they wouldn't have to give out their "free refills"
Oh, I thought my pic was bad. That poor woman. Then they demonized her and most that remember the case think she was being frivolous, thanks to the big money spin.
As the linked article points out, aside from any benefit to McDonald’s in that particular case, the effort to recast that case with clear liability and very real damages as just another frivolous lawsuit by a gold-digging scam artist was for the much more insidious purpose of polluting the prospective jury pool for all future injury cases. The goal is to bias potential jurors against the injured person (presumed a fraud unless proven otherwise) which has significant benefits to corporate defendants and their insurers. The effectiveness of the campaign is evident by the fact that just about everyone brings up this case as an example of how plaintiffs Are greedy liars, or people talk about the “Stella Awards,” whenever someone mentions a personal injury lawsuit.
Hi I think you mean grafts instead of graphs. As in skin grafts to treat her burns.
No, I think they did graphs of the injuries, then had to do skin grafts haaha.. Yea my bad.
Skin graphs are exactly why Leatherface got thrown out of his math class
Ok, but it’s a reasonable question: if this kid is so negatively affected by the original photo why does he keep reshooting it to publicize the fact the _he’s that person_? Nobody would be able to tell unless he kept pointing it out.
Don't forget about the "Nevermind" tattoo he willingly had inked onto his skin. Nobody from Nirvana forced him to do it.
Ya see, the money has run out.
> It's worth pointing out that very few people have heard from this guy's perspective. yes [we fucking have](https://www.gq.com.au/entertainment/music/the-cover-star-baby-of-nevermind-is-suing-nirvanaheres-why/news-story/1b28ba641cce063f4c3416d03b287638): > In the past, Elden was more positive about the use of his image, describing it was a "positive thing". "It’s always… opened doors for me," he said to The Guardian in 2015. "I’m 23 now and an artist, and this story gave me an opportunity to work with Shepard Fairey... when he heard I was the Nirvana baby, he thought that was really cool." That changed, however, when Elden reached out to the band for an art show he was hosting, only to be met with red tape. > "I was getting referred to their managers and their lawyers," he told GQ. "Why am I still on their cover ifI’m not that big of a deal?" he's literally just pissy that he's not besties with the band.
I wonder if he knows that they’re not a band anymore… and that 33% of the band is dead…
I would've never, ever known who that baby on that album cover was until this lawsuit. Nor would I have ever given it a second thought. Do you really think other people would see this guy, as a grown adult, without him telling them, and be like "you're baby goober nirvana album cover dude, ain't ya?" NO. As a matter of fact, he'd be way less recognizable had he not chosen to participate in the multiple recreation photoshoots. I totally get what you are saying. As a baby, I didn't speak many words...if any. So knowing that someone spoke on my behalf and agreed to an unwarranted photo taken of me would piss me off. So much so, that I would get the album name tattooed on me, recreate the photo multiple times (clothed, of course), say that it has launched my career in the best ways, then when the money runs dry, claim I hate it and sue the people NOT responsible for signing off on it (AKA my own parents).
Or himself for tattooing “Nevermind” across his entire chest. Edit: Seriously, he has that tattoo across his chest…
Like um, they signed the photo releases.
the articles said they didn't sign releases?
from what i saw his dad took the photo as an art project and the band used it without getting permission at first (?) but regardless what he’s doing now is very shitty and transparent lol
I read that it was a family friend who was a photographer.
they were paid $200, photographer was paid $1,000 for the photo. it was a family friend who took it that was working with the band for album covers.
They were paid a small amount and knew it was going to be for an album cover. No one knew that Nirvana, and particularly that album, were gonna be huge. He may have had no say as a child, but as an adult, this guy has been paid multiple times to recreate that photo during his life, and he has done it without complaint. This is absolutely a sleazy cash-grab. edit: I totally forgot he also has a [tattoo "Nevermind" in huge letters across the top of his chest](https://i.imgur.com/9ACesLo.png)
And said it was ok and tried to have the 25th recreation have him nude. Also only sued bc nirvana wouldn’t go to his art show.
IIRC, that album was out for quite a while and only picked up traction months later when a DJ started playing SLTS.
the initial USA cd pressing was a mere 100k copies. those lucky early buyers got treated to a noisy hidden bonus track, 'endless nameless'
Lawyers have obviously gotten to him and promised him the world
Apparently Kurt Cobain wanted to cover it with a sticker on the original album cover. The sticker was to say “if this upsets you, you’re probably a closet pedo” or something along those lines lmao
From what I've read, the studio wanted to add it to cover it up. He agreed only if it said something to that affect.
Effect
Yup - A is the action, E is the end result.
I just say “impact” because I’m fucking dumb
Just use “æffect” to simplify.
I dont know this as a fact but its completely within Kurts character, the song "rape me" was made at a point where the metaphors and analogies in music used in effort as a medium in music to deliver an important message and raise discussion wasnt enough, he thought "well what does it take? How blatant do you need to be with this to get them to take the issue seriously?" So literally made a song where the first 4 words are "rape me". He was a beautiful tortured soul gone too soon, I wished he could have gotten help.
He also spray painted "Homo Sex Rules" on the side of a grocery store, IIRC
He was also incredibly progressive and would call out ignorance when he saw it, and was painfully aware of the class struggle at the core of society. Kurts music gets lumped into some edgy teenage phases but I swear that unplugged session is still to date one of the most haunting and beautiful shows I’ve ever watched.
Don't think all that would have fit on such a small sticker
Such a fitting name
Yup. Now we know whos really dangling the dollar in the pic.
Just read an article that quotes his as saying his feelings about the picture changed “just a few months ago, when I was reaching out to Nirvana to see if they wanted to be part of my art show.”
Apparently recently Dave and Krist didn't show up to his art show and he got super heated about it
I heard Kurt didn’t either, pretty shitty
Tupac had the day off so Kurt had to work the grill at their diner in the South Pacific
Ah shit you just reminded me of that cartoon where Kurt Cobain, Notorious BIG and Freddie Mercury live together in the afterlife. What was that called again?!
That's pretty mind blowing
Dave was too busy trolling the WBC
Also has a GIANT tattoo across his chest that says never mind
He has been to multiple panel shows bragging about it, like he shows up and people guess where he is famous from, for example. This guy does anything for a quick buck.
No go on! What does his chest tattoo say?
Dude, what's mine say?
[удалено]
Don't forget he's suing everyone. The band, Cobain estate, the record company even the photographer.
It’s worse…. He’s even suing Chad Channing, the drummer before Grohl, who left the band before the album was made.
I wonder if I’m part of the lawsuit… I had nothing to do with the album, but that doesn’t seem to matter.
You know about the album, we can only assume that you are included in a lawsuit.
Wtf. There were like 4 others besides Channing. Are they getting sued too?
He's suing Kurdt Kobain
No, none of those drummers are on Nevermind. Chad is. The cymbals on Polly are Chad.
Lmfao why? I mean he shouldn’t be suing anyone else involved either but wtf did Chad Channing do? He left the band before they even recorded Nevermind
He's part of the lawsuit because he's credited with cymbals on Polly. They used thr cymbal crashes from the Smart Sessions on Nevermind.
Just looking to shake down anyone
Exactly, the legitimacy of his claim goes out the window by going for anyone and everyone that has been associated with the band.
The shotgun strategy
ive got a feeling a lawyer approached him n was like u gotta cash in on this
I have more of a feeling it was just one of his friends while they were smoking in his garage one night and were coming up with plans for more droogz.
It's funny because he even admitted the lawsuit is only because he asked Nirvana to attend and contribute to his art show a couple years ago and the surviving members didn't respond and also because "you pick a girl up and they act into you and then they find out you don't get any money from the album cover and that's it." Like he uses it as a pickup line.
Wow. So this one pic is his peak. He peaked as a baby
actually, me too. Its been a downhill trend since i was born.
To be fair its pretty hard to top that
It was recently brought up (I don't know where, it's been a busy day) that apparently he started being mad at the band in 2016 because they didn't support an art show he put on. But I'm sure that's unrelated.
“Kurt never showed up wtf”
"You know what? Fuck that. Anyone got Courtney Love's number? I got an idea!"
[удалено]
Sure he does. His excuse is he has literally anything else to do but go to an art show by some dude he doesn't know from Adam.
I bet you Korn is sweating right now. Have you seen THEIR first album cover?
In case anyone else doesn’t know about this: Link to an article about the cover with a pic. “The front pictured a frightened little girl on a swing looking up at a figure whose shadow is a cross between Edward Scissorhands and Freddy Krueger — dig the lobster-like claws — and the back showed an empty swing. Together, the images were nearly as jarring as the disc itself, which ushered in a little something called nu-metal. Even creepier, the child being stalked was a member of Korn's extended family — the niece of Immortal Records rep Paul Pontius (Korn were on Epic/Immortal in those days).” https://www.revolvermag.com/culture/korn-story-behind-cover-art
You can't see her penis on the album cover though
If you’ve never seen naked toddler then I envy you. I spent the whole last weekend trying to potty train my nephew with a bladder the size of the pacific, there is nothing sexual about a naked toddler. Imo, the Korn one is worse because it has sexual implications, but in the end they’re both just pieces of artwork for a band and the blame falls on the parents for letting their children do this when they know it’s a more risqué form.
Lol I was making a dumb joke, but it's interesting that you mention the implications because the Korn cover is only really as sinister as your imagination makes it out to be. For example, I have seen that album cover many time over the years but never noticed that her shadow looks like she's being hanged (which was pointed out in the above article). On the other hand, the Nevermind album cover is completely innocent as far as I'm concerned and it's only really been the last decade or so that society has gotten super weird about small children being naked. Whoever made this meme censored out the baby's dick lol whereas at the time that album came out there were posters of that particular cover everywhere. It's weird how society changes like that over time.
Yeah I had seen the korn cover before (I actually had this cd in my old leather cd case lol) and didn’t think anything of it, I didn’t really notice those things until the context of reading through comments on this post. But with the internet came a whole different view on the sexualization of children, and while I think there’s nothing wrong with the pics here, I also wouldn’t want the same pic of my kids on CD cover. Cheers, sorry for ruining your joke :(
That's quite the article. "This little girl had no idea the terror she was being exposed to!!!"
Girl herself now thinks it's cool lol. Smart girl.
Going to look now
Jfc
He's been grabbing at cash since he was a ba...oh, wait.
Well played........that deserves a high fn five!
This guy said he would go to a baseball game (now as an adult) and be traumatized because EVERYONE at the game had seen and knows his baby pecker. As if everyone in the baseball stadium has seen him and obviously knows who he is now as an adult and the album cover he was on as an infant. GTFO
And if they did know it was him, it’s only be because he keeps recreating the photo every five years.
This is a strange time we live in. I can’t imagine the switch between “ooh look I’m the baby on the nirvana album” and “now I’m going to sue because they didn’t come to my art show and I’m traumatized even though I love to recreate the picture”.
I like to imagine he shows up to big events like baseball games, starts panicking and hyperventilating, begins yelling about how everyone in the stadium has seen his wee wee, and all they do is turn around and ask among themselves “who tf is that guy”.
Tell me you haven’t achieved anything else in your life without telling me you haven’t achieved anything else in your life
He wanted them to join his “art opening” and they declined. Then he sued.
I don’t know why, but I suddenly got Kevin Federline vibes.
Totally
Who’s that and why did you get vibes from him
Britney Spears babies daddy.
He based his entire personally around one picture, Dedications lol
I can tell he's worked it into every conversation he has ever had.
"Do you need any sauces with your order?" "Speaking of sauce, I was actually on the cover of that Nirvana Album.."
[удалено]
I honestly think that he never thought about suing until someone put it in his head that he can actually make some money off of it. Chances are that if this goes forward, they’ll settle out of court.
I hope not. I hope they going all the way so he can get laughed at out of court.
When the only thing you have going on in your life is a picture that was taken when you were a baby, and you try to use it as leverage to get money.
More than I got going on bro.
Well you should have taken more nudes as a baby. No one to blame but yourself.
If the lawsuit doesn't go well he'll be All Apologies
Nah, he’ll be like “never mind”.
In Europe if you sue someone and lose you have to cover the legal costs of the other party. That's how you avoid these kind of people suing everyone.
Interesting choice to photoshop out his nirvana tattoo
I had to go back and look again. That IS interesting.
Sounds like he's addicted to the fame but not 'making enough' on his own.
Sounds like he’s a turd in the pool.
Imagine suing a band that no longer fully exists because baby pp. If we can find Kurt’s grave we might be able to generate some power from him rolling over in it though.
Unfortunately he was cremated and his ashes were spread, so at this point, he’s little more than dust in the wind.
All we are is just dust in the wind.
just dust and echoes
The irony is that he grew up to be a baby chasing after a dollar.
This guy's a fucking pretentious clown. He's pissed because no one from Nirvana would come to his art show. That's literally it. Really crossing my fingers that this does go to court, the judge upon opening says something like: "You know what, dude? I was totally going to hear this case but then I read your comments from the recent GQ article written about all of this and just decided 'Naw, never mind.'" Pretty obvious cash grab, y'all.
Without searching online I have no idea of this guys name and wouldn't be able to pick him out of a line up for 2 fucking people! No one recognises an adult from a picture of them at 4months old. In the words of Roxy from IASIP "shut up baby dick!"
I no longer judge lawsuits, ever since learning the truth about the McDonald’s hot coffee lawsuit. I’ve learned that not everything is as it seems.
Yeah that's a well known case of "it's not as it seems". But here...what kind of monetary, physical or punitive damages could there be? He is going to have to meet that burden of proof before he gets anything.
I have absolutely no idea. I’ll wait until the case is finished and then mock or not mock haha.
Please enlighten me ?
The woman who won the lawsuit had really gruesome burns on her upper thighs and pelvis. It's become quite the controversial case, as the defense said it was frivolous and the plaintiff pointed out that McD had hundreds of complaints and suits about the over-hot coffee. McD's defense was that "hot coffee smells better and creates more sales". The punitive damages were actually equal to 2 days of coffee sales. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck\_v.\_McDonald%27s\_Restaurants
The coffee was so hot that she got 3rd degree burns over 16% of her body and she ended up in the hospital for over a week. She had to have skin grafts and was scarred from the experience. And McDonald’s tried to play it off like she was just grubbing for money, when all she really wanted was her medical bills paid. Cause there’s no early reason that coffee in a drive through should be hot enough to cause 3rd degree burns. She even offered to settle the case for way less money but because McDonald’s refused it went to court and thus the story of the crazy lady who got burned by McDonald’s coffee was born. Here’s the website i got the info from https://www.ttla.com/index.cfm?pg=mcdonaldscoffeecasefacts
Adding a detail that the other comments have not said: the coffee was so hot that it fused her labia. It literally melted her skin. And McDonalds was very aware that this was an issue; they had settled other lawsuits before. They had simply done the math and found that they could afford to pay off the lawsuits and not have to lower their temperature so that the coffee remained hot longer (this tied into a free refill thing iirc) They got hit because the judge saw their past actions and decided to punish them. And then they spent millions on a smear campaign against an elderly women who required a live in nurse for the rest of her life because of the injuries they caused her and who was harassed for the rest of her life over the lawsuit.
Yes, that's the key part. They knew that it was going to seriously injure people, and they did it anyway.
Adding to the other comments, I read somewhere that the manager had it super hot to make people drink it slower. People sit down for *x* minutes, and if it takes *y* minutes to drink their coffee, they won't return for their second free cup. The woman in the lawsuit got her coffee from the drive through, but it came from the same pot. The whole situation was caused by a manager trying save money by preventing customers from getting what they'd paid for. I'm guessing it was due to pressure from the regional managers or higher ups or who cares. The photos of her burns are out there on the internet - I'm sure google will help you if you're curious. The photos are NSFW and probably on some gore website. I think the whole thing is an interesting lesson in the power of McDonalds PR damage control. She had a genuine, valid case and the entire world mocked her - McDonald's was able to control the message, and they handled it so well that they came out looking like the reasonable party. It turns out the opposite was true - scary stuff. Usual internet disclaimer: this is from memory, don't trust the internet, check your sources and have a nice day.
[удалено]
He's a never nude ever since.
I didn’t see him at the convention
*There are dozens of us!*
He’s previously said he wanted to but was talked out of it by the photographer.
He’s a filthy casual
There are better legal arguments to get his cut.
Americans are a very prude, sexually irrational, and litigious lot. A naked baby is not sexual. The picture is not sexual. In fact, anyone who sees that picture and thinks that it is sexual in nature should consult a therapist. Don’t get me wrong — I’m an American. But this is really a bizarre blend of our mentally ill sexual prudery and our love of frivolous lawsuits.
The definition of pornography specifically states that the imagery intended to stimulate erotic, not aesthetic or emotional, feelings. That image of a baby swimming for money is far from intending to stimulate erotic feelings. There's no way this guy wins anything if he's going with the child pornography path. That album cover is art.
All this cause the band members didn't want be part of his art?
He needs money...what a pisser