advertisement


Nevermind the bollocks?

kensalriser said:
Yes, you would be very well advised to keep a contract of any kind. Otherwise how would you prove your rights under that contract?

It's hard to imagine a suit would be filed if it could immediately be dismissed by statute of limitation.
Click to expand...
I don't know about the USA but in England limitation in injury cases doesn't start to run till you hit 18.
 
F*cking unbelievable. It seems that there is no length that people won't go to make a bob or two..
 
"Kirk Weddle, who shot the image, told the Guardian in 2019: “I’m still in contact with Spencer. I used to think, ‘Man, when that kid is 16 he’s gonna hate my guts!’ He doesn’t, but he’s conflicted about the picture. He feels that everybody made money off it and he didn’t. I think he deserves something. But it’s always the record labels that make the money.”

That doesnt seem entirely unreasonable to me. Albeit it was his parents who put him in that position (ahem) it doesn't seem unfair that in his later life he's decided to look for a bob or two from the use of his image.

An out of court settlement for a more modest amount would see to be reasonable outcome for all involved surely ?
 
JensenHealey said:
This is bizarre. the chap concerned has been quite happy to enjoy his baby fame, and has posed for the cameras to reproduce the picture in his adult life multiple times. The story I read with the 'claims' goes beyond bizarre. I can only conclude that he is short of money and some fancy lawyer has put him up to it.
Click to expand...

He also has "Nevermind" tattooed over his chest.
He is probably right that he deserves some sort of paycheck - for the use of the photo, not because he is a victim of child sex abuse, as he/his lawyer claims. And the whole "commercial child sexual exploitation of him from while he was a minor to the present day … defendants knowingly produced, possessed and advertised commercial child pornography" is just made up to speed the settlement.
 
Howdy said:
He is probably right that he deserves some sort of paycheck - for the use of the photo
Click to expand...
We might all agree that he deserves, in the moral sense, some compensation for the photo. However, if the contract(s) between the parents, the photographer, and the record label don't provide for this, there's f*** all he can do about it. Add him to the long list of people screwed over by the music industry. Screaming about sex abuse where there clearly hasn't been any will only make him look like a prick, and that seems to be the reaction of the internet at large to this. I haven't seen a single comment in support of his stance. Streisand effect at its best.
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
Perhaps he should offer to re-shoot the picture now, for the cover of a greatest hits album.
Click to expand...

2591665
 
His lawyers aren’t actually asking for megabucks, something like $150,000 each from the surviving members of Nirvana and something similar from the record company and whoever else was involved. Probably about $1m for him after the lawyers cut. Pretty much around the cheaper to settle out of court level, which is where I think it’s going to go.

I’ll admit to having some sympathy for him, to some degree.
 
I should sue them as well, for making me look at a naked baby, everytime i get the cd out for a play, it has destroyed a part of my life, with “extreme and permanent emotional distress with physical manifestations, :eek: jump and bandwagon comes to mind, i hope he fails,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top