“He has reenacted the photograph in exchange for a fee, many times he has had the album title ‘Nevermind’ tattooed across his chest he has appeared on a talk show wearing a self parodying, nude-colored onesie he has autographed copies of the album cover for sale on eBay and he has used the connection to try to pick up women.” “Elden has spent three decades profiting from his celebrity as the self-anointed ‘Nirvana Baby,‘” the document says. The motion says the lawsuit is “on its face, not serious,” and Elden’s conduct reflects that. 22 by Nirvana’s attorneys argues that the suit was filed well past the 10-year statute of limitations of one of the laws used as a cause of action, and that another law it cites wasn’t enacted until 2003 and was not retroactive. The lawsuit, filed in August in federal court in California, said that Elden had suffered “lifelong damages” as the band and others profited from the ubiquitous image of him naked underwater appearing to swim after a dollar bill on a fish hook. The dismissal came after Elden’s attorneys did not file an opposition to the defendants’ motion to dismiss by a Dec. Olguin on Monday granted a motion to dismiss the suit from the defendants, who include surviving Nirvana members Dave Grohl and Krist Novoselic and the estate of Kurt Cobain, but left the door open for plaintiff Spencer Elden to refile an amended version. LOS ANGELES - A federal judge has dismissed the lawsuit of a 30-year-old man who alleged that the image of him nude as a 4-month-old on the 1991 cover of Nirvana’s “Nevermind” album is child pornography.
0 kommentar(er)
