I would love to know what Elden’s parents were thinking when they accepted $200 from the photographer, who was a friend of his father’s, in exchange for allowing their son to be photographed. He added, “Spencer is doing this at an age that is on the young side.” Lewis said many of the clients he has represented, and who were abused as children, are in their 30s, 40s and 50s. It’s harmful to me.’ He has done a lot of trauma work over the years and has come to realize that his image, the pornographic nature of it, has seriously impacted his life in ways he didn’t understand as a young person.” While many people interpret the photo as a critique of capitalism - and I am among them - it is hardly the place of strangers to tell Elden how he should feel.Īs his lawyer put it, “In his 20s, a number of things became clear to him, and he said: ‘Enough of this. On reflection, however, it raises important questions about consent and the exploitation of children and babies in any sort of artistic venture, particularly commercial art. How is the baby’s penis offensive? What about artistic license? Why wait 30 years to sue? And why not sue the parents, who, after all, offered up their baby? More important, said Lewis, a former federal prosecutor whose law firm has handled child pornography cases for decades, Elden wants his genitals obscured in any future releases of the image, including a rumored reissuing of the album in September to coincide with its 30th anniversary.Īt first blush, this lawsuit seems far-fetched.
“The money is peanuts compared to what they have made and continue to make on this,” Elden’s attorney, Robert Lewis, said by phone Friday morning. (None has yet commented publicly on the lawsuit.) He wants at least $150,000 from each of more than a dozen defendants, which include Nirvana LLC Kurt Cobain’s estate and his widow, Courtney Love photographer Kirk Weddle cover designer Robert Fisher surviving bandmates Dave Grohl and Krist Novoselic plus a handful of record companies.
0 kommentar(er)
