Court Rules (Again!) in Nirvana 'Nevermind' Lawsuit Over Naked Baby Image

A federal court has ruled in favor of the members of Nirvana in a case brought by Spencer Elden, the now grown man who was the naked baby that appeared on the band's iconic 1991 album cover for Nevermind.

Per Billboard, federal judge Fernando M. Olguin dismissed Elden's lawsuit on Tuesday (Sept. 30), sharing in his ruling that it was "not child pornography" and stating that the famous image did not come close to meeting the definition of the term under federal law.

“Neither the pose, focal point, setting, nor overall context suggest the album cover features sexually explicit conduct,” Judge Fernando M. Olguin wrote in his ruling. "This image – an image that is most analogous to a family photo of a nude child bathing – is plainly insufficient to support a finding of [child pornography].”

Why Did Spencer Elden Sue Nirvana Over 'Nevermind' Album Art?

In 2021, Spencer Elden sued Nirvana and Kurt Cobain's estate claiming that they "knowingly produced, possessed and advertised commercial child pornography."

“Spencer’s true identity and legal name are forever tied to the commercial sexual exploitation he experienced as a minor,” his lawyers wrote at the time.

The suit had been dismissed multiple times, most recently in 2022  when Olguin ruled that Elden "had an opportunity to address the deficiencies in his complaint regarding the statute of limitations, the court is persuaded that it would be futile to afford plaintiff a fourth opportunity to file an amended complaint."

READ MORE: Bill Maher Weighs in on Nirvana Baby Lawsuit - 'Stop Being Such a F---ing Baby'

However, in 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed the lower court's decision to toss the lawsuit, reasoning that the statute of limitations had not passed because the Nevermind cover was republished in 2021 for the album’s 30th anniversary. At the time, the U.S. Court of Appeals “held that each republication of the cover may constitute a new injury to Elden."

What Dave Grohl Previously Said About the Lawsuit

Asked about Elden's previous legal actions, former Nirvana drummer Dave Grohl expressed indifference. “I think that there’s much more to look forward to and much more to life than getting bogged down in those kinds of things,” the rocker explained in 2021. “And, fortunately, I don’t have to do the paperwork.”

Still, Grohl did suggest that the cover could be changed for future releases.

“I have many ideas of how we should alter that cover but we’ll see what happens,” Grohl admitted. “We’ll let you know. I’m sure we’ll come up with something good.”

More About the Past and Present Rulings

As stated, Elden's case had been dismissed multiple times only to be revived. Upon the 2022, ruling Judge Olgui had dismissed the case due to Elden waiting beyond the statute of limitations to file.

Now two years, Olguin has gone more in depth about the case not meeting the argument for child pornography. Per Billboard, quoting from one of his earlier rulings, the judge stated, "Nudity must be coupled with other circumstances that make the visual depiction lascivious or sexually provocative."

Olguin also questioned Elden why he had seemed to endorse the photo over the years, commenting, “Plaintiff has, for many years, embraced and financially benefited from being featured on the album cover. Plaintiff’s actions relating to the album over time are difficult to square with his contentions that the album cover constitutes child pornography and that he sustained serious damages as a result.”

Though the case has been dismissed multiple times only to be revived, it is possible for Elden's legal team to appeal the ruling once more.