Jump to content

Baby sues Nirvana


Der Kaiser

Recommended Posts

William H. Bonney

He comes across as a total welt. Unless he directly tells people who heis the vast majority will be oblivious to his fame. 
He’s clearly skint. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Салатные палочки

Smells Like a Lawsuit. 

 

Strange one. It's a classic album and one of the most recognisable covers in the world but it is kinda weird looking back. I have no issue with it but many would, especially in the current climate.

 

Was there not someone who had a 15 year old girl naked on the front cover or inside sleeve of an album? Think it was some 70's rock band. Also, the Pistols had a naked Soo Catwoman in the Great Rock and Roll Swindle and she was 14 at the time or something. Could be wrong. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't seem like he was that "exploited" by it when he gave this quote 6 years ago. At it.

 

"It's always been a positive thing and opened doors for me," he told the Guardian six years ago. "I'm 23 now and an artist, and this story gave me an opportunity to work with Shepard Fairey for five years, which was an awesome experience. He is a huge music connoisseur: when he heard I was the Nirvana baby, he thought that was really cool."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Get a ****ing job you prick.

 

You were just a baby model used for one day.  A day for which your parents I assume were paid a sum for.

 

You contribute **** all, you add nothing to the album.  Any baby boy on the planet could have replaced you.

 

Why should the real contributors to this great album give you shit?  

 

The ***** probably thinks he is entitled to royalties too.

 

*****.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Salad Fingers said:

Smells Like a Lawsuit. 

 

Strange one. It's a classic album and one of the most recognisable covers in the world but it is kinda weird looking back. I have no issue with it but many would, especially in the current climate.

 

Was there not someone who had a 15 year old girl naked on the front cover or inside sleeve of an album? Think it was some 70's rock band. Also, the Pistols had a naked Soo Catwoman in the Great Rock and Roll Swindle and she was 14 at the time or something. Could be wrong. 

 

I think Soo Catwoman was much older than that when she became known as a Pistols hanger-on / Bromley Contingent member.  More like 18 or 20 or so.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hugh Phamism
48 minutes ago, Salad Fingers said:

Smells Like a Lawsuit. 

 

Strange one. It's a classic album and one of the most recognisable covers in the world but it is kinda weird looking back. I have no issue with it but many would, especially in the current climate.

 

Was there not someone who had a 15 year old girl naked on the front cover or inside sleeve of an album? Think it was some 70's rock band. Also, the Pistols had a naked Soo Catwoman in the Great Rock and Roll Swindle and she was 14 at the time or something. Could be wrong. 

 

Led Zeppelin - Houses of the Holy??

 

Pic.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

I think Soo Catwoman was much older than that when she became known as a Pistols hanger-on / Bromley Contingent member.  More like 18 or 20 or so.  

I read an interview with soo and she said it's not her in the photo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Салатные палочки
3 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

If he wins, everyone with that album will have child porn in their house. Get 'em on the register!

 

I gave my copy to my son :greggy:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, tedarmy said:

I read an interview with soo and she said it's not her in the photo. 

 

Think she's tried to disassociate herself with that entire era and a lot of the dubious characters that were around.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Салатные палочки
14 minutes ago, Hugh Phamism said:

 

Led Zeppelin - Houses of the Holy??

 

Pic.jpg

 

This was more full-frontal. A girl with long dark hair and a white/light background. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Салатные палочки
13 minutes ago, tedarmy said:

The blind faith album may be the one. 

 

That's the one! 

 

Forget the white/light background. That may be another one. I just googled controversial album covers and it was on the list. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was also the EP The Last of the Mohicans by Bow Wow Wow with 15 year old lead singer Annabella Lwin on the cover. That Malcolm McLaren was a rogue eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, PortyJambo said:

Doesn't seem like he was that "exploited" by it when he gave this quote 6 years ago. At it.

 

"It's always been a positive thing and opened doors for me," he told the Guardian six years ago. "I'm 23 now and an artist, and this story gave me an opportunity to work with Shepard Fairey for five years, which was an awesome experience. He is a huge music connoisseur: when he heard I was the Nirvana baby, he thought that was really cool."

 

And that statement should be the end of the case right there and then.

 

Judge - At what point did you realise or think that you'd been exploited.

Nirvana Baby - Right about when the work started to dry up and the paychecks stopped.

Judge - Case dismissed.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Hugh Phamism said:

 

Led Zeppelin - Houses of the Holy??

 

Pic.jpg


The girl on the cover is Samantha Gates and her brother Stefan. She was in ‘The Water Babies’ movie. One of my favourites when I was wee.

 

Wee bit of useless trivia there.

 

178321-samantha-gates.jpg

Edited by iantjambo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Der Kaiser said:

BBC News - Nirvana sued by the baby from Nevermind's album cover
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-58327844

 

Recreated the image numerous times.

Said it opened doors for him.

 

But now....

I'm guessing paychecks have been light of late so he needs a balance top up

 

That's how I see it. I'd be over the moon if my baby pictures were on an album cover, especially a Nirvana one. He's just trying to screw money out them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Findlay
16 hours ago, JackLadd said:

Only wants $2.5m for his exploited helmet. Reasonable sum.

Being America the land of litigation, he will probably get it. Squander it and try and sue again in 5 to 10 years time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, John Findlay said:

Being America the land of litigation, he will probably get it. Squander it and try and sue again in 5 to 10 years time.

I saw a quote from his lawyer saying that having the dollar bill there "made him look like a sex worker."  Money grabbing wee shite, more like.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, milky_26 said:

surely it should be his parents he is suing as they allowed it and could be seen as it was them exploiting him

 

Ah, they probably don't have millions of $$$$$$$$.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, John Findlay said:

Being America the land of litigation, he will probably get it. Squander it and try and sue again in 5 to 10 years time.

 

I don't think the guy has a leg to stand on here.  Any competent lawyer will use his own public domain interviews against him and get it thrown out of court in no time.

 

He is going to have a hard time proving his case against Nirvana.  Did Nirvana have much or any input into the cover?  Then he is going to have to explain how he has been damaged by this case.

 

Nobody forced him to do all these interviews and photo shoot recreations for money about his fame.

Edited by frankblack
Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Findlay
48 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

I don't think the guy has a leg to stand on here.  Any competent lawyer will use his own public domain interviews against him and get it thrown out of court in no time.

 

He is going to have a hard time proving his case against Nirvana.  Did Nirvana have much or any input into the cover?  Then he is going to have to explain how he has been damaged by this case.

 

Nobody forced him to do all these interviews and photo shoot recreations for money about his fame.

To most sensible people you are spot on. But, when it comes to litigation in the USA, sensible goes out the window.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, frankblack said:

 

I don't think the guy has a leg to stand on here.  Any competent lawyer will use his own public domain interviews against him and get it thrown out of court in no time.

 

He is going to have a hard time proving his case against Nirvana.  Did Nirvana have much or any input into the cover?  Then he is going to have to explain how he has been damaged by this case.

 

Nobody forced him to do all these interviews and photo shoot recreations for money about his fame.

So damaged that he went and got a big 'Nevermind' tattoo on his chest.

Spencer.jpg?w=600&ssl=1

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Lemongrab said:

So damaged that he went and got a big 'Nevermind' tattoo on his chest.

Spencer.jpg?w=600&ssl=1

 

 

That is one of the photos I remember seeing in a music magazine.  Is he also suing these people?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he wins and the image is deemed to be child porn, then it's going to open up a massive minefield.

What do the Police do, do they pursue and charge everyone who has this album cover for having child porn, probably not as it's sold many millions of copies and it would be almost impossible to track every copy down and who owns it, so in effect people will be allowed to keep & own child porn.

 

If that's the case, then it won't be long before some clever lawyer argues in court that if people can have this image and not be prosecuted then what about this image and that image and this one and that one etc etc, and from there it's a rapid decent into the cesspit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

If he wins and the image is deemed to be child porn, then it's going to open up a massive minefield.

What do the Police do, do they pursue and charge everyone who has this album cover for having child porn, probably not as it's sold many millions of copies and it would be almost impossible to track every copy down and who owns it, so in effect people will be allowed to keep & own child porn.

 

If that's the case, then it won't be long before some clever lawyer argues in court that if people can have this image and not be prosecuted then what about this image and that image and this one and that one etc etc, and from there it's a rapid decent into the cesspit.

 

It would set a dangerous precedent that would damage the art world including film and photography.

 

That album cover was an artistic statement of a baby chasing/swimming to a dollar note on a fishing line.

 

You would have to be pretty sick to see otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

It would set a dangerous precedent that would damage the art world including film and photography.

 

That album cover was an artistic statement of a baby chasing/swimming to a dollar note on a fishing line.

 

You would have to be pretty sick to see otherwise.

I was discussing this with a very right on PC friend last night and the conclusion we came to was that pretty much most things will be a turn on to someone out there. Especially photos of children but you can’t ban all images. She’s a dancer and put a photo of her feet on Instagram and got some very lewd messages. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

It would set a dangerous precedent that would damage the art world including film and photography.

 

That album cover was an artistic statement of a baby chasing/swimming to a dollar note on a fishing line.

 

You would have to be pretty sick to see otherwise.

 

Yes it would, legal disclaimers all over the place.

 

I'd say 99% of people have for the last 20 odd years seen that photo as nothing more than a kid in a pool reaching for a dollar note, it's only been sexualised to the masses by the guy himself, apart from that 1% who do/have seen it differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
On 25/08/2021 at 15:17, Les Izemore said:

There was also the EP The Last of the Mohicans by Bow Wow Wow with 15 year old lead singer Annabella Lwin on the cover. That Malcolm McLaren was a rogue eh?


Love her birth name 

 

19 minutes ago, PortyJambo said:


Good

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Savage Vince
On 27/08/2021 at 14:58, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Yes it would, legal disclaimers all over the place.

 

I'd say 99% of people have for the last 20 odd years seen that photo as nothing more than a kid in a pool reaching for a dollar note, it's only been sexualised to the masses by the guy himself, apart from that 1% who do/have seen it differently.

 

Tbf, that 1% would represent an awful lot of people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
2 hours ago, Cade said:

Feckin ringpiece has amended and re-submitted his claim

 

:rofl:

 

Are his Lawyers working pro-bono as surely he couldn't afford to pay costs to the defendant lawyers on a loss?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...