A much-publicised lawsuit involving what is probably the most iconic rock album of the 1990s has finally been resolved by a judge in a California district court

What’s the record?

It is Nevermind by American band Nirvana, released 31 years ago this month and responsible for sparking what music critic William Goodman has called “a cultural revolution across the globe.” That cultural revolution is better known as grunge and Goodman was writing on the occasion of the album’s 25th anniversary in 2016. A decade and a half earlier, in 2003, Rolling Stone magazine placed Nevermind at number 17 in its 500 Greatest Records Of All Time list, ahead of Bruce Springsteen’s Born To Run and Michael Jackson’s Thriller and only just behind Abbey Road, Are You Experienced? and The Velvet Underground And Nico, three seminal rock albums by, respectively, The Beatles, Jimi Hendrix and The Velvet Undergound. “No album in recent history had such an overpowering impact on a generation,” the magazine wrote. Few would argue.

And what’s the beef?

It concerns the equally iconic cover image, an underwater shot by photographer Kirk Weddle of a naked baby swimming towards a dollar bill fixed to a fish hook.

Sounds cute …

The baby doesn’t think so. Spender Elden was only four months old when the photograph was taken so obviously he couldn’t give his consent and he has no memory of the shoot. Weddle was a friend of his parents, which is how he landed the gig. Now 31, he feels conflicted about it – conflicted enough to have sued the surviving members as well as Kurt Cobain’s widow Courtney Love and several record labels. The lawsuit accused the defendants, 15 in all, of “commercial child sexual exploitation” and stated that they “knowingly produced, possessed and advertised commercial child pornography” depicting him. As recompense, Elden sought damages of $150,000 (£130,000) from each of the defendants.

Did he win?

He did not. Elden first filed a claim in August 2021 but that was thrown out on a technicality “with leave to amend”. Elden and his legal team refiled, but US judge Fernando Olguin ruled against him again this month. The beak’s eight page statement said, in essence, that Elden had waited too long to file his lawsuit so it fell under the 10 year statute of limitations. “The court concludes that his claim is untimely,” Olguin wrote. Nirvana’s lawyer, Bert Deixler, added: “We are pleased that this meritless case has been brought to a speedy final conclusion.” The band’s legal team has also noted that Elden previously made capital of his association with Nirvana by selling autographed copies of the image and even recreating it.

And Spencer Elden himself?

He plans to appeal.