5 ms·
The issue is not his nudity so much as the commercial use of his image.
by dbingham 5y ago
The issue is not his nudity so much as the commercial use of his image.
- ravenstine 5y agoDid you even read the lede? > Spencer Elden, the man who was photographed as a baby on the album cover for Nirvana's Nevermind, is suing the band alleging sexual exploitation. The article goes on: > He also alleges the nude image constitutes child pornography. > However, Elden's lawyer, Robert Y. Lewis, argues that the inclusion of the dollar bill (which was superimposed after the photograph was taken) makes the minor seem "like a sex worker". It amazes me just how many HN users just say stuff without reading anything. The person being replied to also doesn't deserve the downvotes; it's an entirely valid point that the general population is likely to agree with. (not saying you downvoted in particular... I just find it baffling.)
- jollybean 5y agoMaybe this is perhaps one of the greatest artistic ironies ever? The 'barely born baby, into the world chasing the dollar on the devil's rod' ... has come to life in the 'baby adult demanding money for something he's probably not owed, making hyperbolic claims of 'child porn'. I think if he were not naked, he would have a much harder time with the 'sex crime' hyperbole. Nudity isn't porn.