He didn’t choose to be on the album cover, but he did choose to spend literally his entire adult life milking “I was the baby on Nevermind,” for profit, right up to a couple months ago, when this happened:
That may be part of the lawsuit. His dick is still the same size and potential partners won’t come near him.
ROTFLMAO! Perhaps!
Absolutely, fair point.
I’ve just been saying in this thread that I don’t think this dude was the victim of a child porn ring. I’m open to considering facts I’m not aware of at this point, and I absolutely think parents should consider the repercussions of decisions they make now for their kids years or decades down the road.
But this ain’t child porn.
Clearly does not get it. Or maybe Sears was done in by all their catalog models looking for a handout.
Man, imagine your art career peaking at 4 months.
I don’t think they made any particular effort to conceal his identity. Rock fans being what they are, he would have become the answer to a trivia question.
I’m sure random people don’t recognize him on the street, but I’m also sure it’s the first thing that comes up when you Google him, and I can believe that’s a drag for him. His own actions may have contributed to that, but I doubt he would have succeeded in remaining completely anonymous even if he’d tried.
You and I have been litigating for about the same length of time, and I don’t think it’s that simple at all. Your position implies that the system always works, but it doesn’t.
People lie to get their damages up. I don’t do injury work but I used to and am still close to people who do. For every person we catch in outright fraud, there are five others whose stories have all the same points of implausibility but we couldn’t get the evidence.
This guy’s claim is based entirely off his state of mind. He may well get a substantive settlement or judgment through telling unfalsifiable lies. Saying that he’s “entitled” to that money because he prevailed is an odd use of the word “entitled” IMHO.
I’d hope Nirvana has lawyers good enough to not concede this. If he can’t prove the identity of the baby as himself, he has no standing and the case gets tossed really quickly. I don’t think that the plaintiff’s years-long claims that it is him is good enough.
I don’t think it’s child porn, that’s ridiculous. I don’t think he has any legitimate legal claim against the band.
If he now claims that he was sexually exploited, I can certainly see his point of view and sympathize with his pain. I think that’s arguably a more mature attitude than the one he’s apparently had until recently.
Given his past history, though, it’s really hard to think that “completely insincere, bullshit publicity/money grab” isn’t the likeliest explanation.
I have no cite for this, could be complete bullshit, but I heard a rumor that at one time this guy was using “Wanna see my penis…again?” as a pickup line.
There was no sexual content in the image so just how was he exploited? Nudity in and of itself is not sexual.
I don’t actually think it meets any reasonable definition of sexual exploitation, but I can easily imagine being upset about it. And if he were to complain about it to me, I wouldn’t feel it necessary to argue the fine points of the language he used to describe that upset…UNLESS, and this is actually a fairly critical caveat, I happened to be a lawyer he was consulting about whether to file a ridiculous lawsuit or not.
Yeah, just because I believe something in the abstract doesnt mean I have to hammer it home with an individual experiencing it. Its common decency. Much of Europe has very casual policies regarding public nudity. It hasnt seemed to do any harm to them.
He wasn’t sexually exploited. End of story. At least as far as this pic is concerned. There’s nothing sexual about it.
Maybe some pedophile got a woody looking at that pic. Do we want to give pedophiles the final say on what’s an innocent picture of a child and what’s not? Pretty sure most of us would say no.
Was he exploited? Well, maybe. See my post above about modeling offers to my own daughter. We (mother and I) said no. Other parents may have different opinions. Fair enough.
His pain? He should get over it (as far as this pic is concerned – I have nothing to say about anything beyond that). And I’d say that to my own children.
According to this article, women dumped him when they found out he wasn’t making money from the photo.
“A naked baby helped Nirvana sell millions of records”? Huh? How many of you bought the album because of the cover photo as opposed to the music on it?
Yes. I bought it for the music and despite the album cover.
At least that one guy from the 1975 catalog
Mariora Goschen (yes, I had to look up her name) is perhaps a precedent for this. Blind Faith covers featuring her 14-year old chichis were replaced in many markets with an anodyne band photo.
Note that Cecil is mentioned in that article.