In my opinion everyone involved exploited a naked baby. Was it child porn, maybe maybe not, the fact that it was never pulled suggests that, at the time, it was not considered child porn but it was making money off a naked baby that had no choice.
If the parents sold that same photo after the child was 18 it would have never flown without his permission.
I have no idea how it should be handled today but he has a right to handle it however he wants. It played out in court and he lost. Maybe parents should not be allowed to exploit their own kids for fun or profit.
It might be helpful to not refer to him as penis baby.
He’s handling it by making some pretty outrageous accusations that he clearly doesn’t believe himself. It’s a pretty serious thing to accuse someone of producing child pornography.
That’s the issue with this whole thing; child porn is a horrific, real problem, and the asshole in question is making light of that problem by trying to make money off a flagrantly false claim. (Again, it speaks volumes that his parents have not been sued.)
Nudity ≠ pornography.
The image is of a naked baby swimming in a pool, alone. There’s nothing sexual about the content.
The only thing that is even remotely ‘suggestive’ about the image is the dollar bill on a fishing hook; which seems like more of a commentary on capitalism.
Agreed; everything about this drawn out story seems like an opportunistic money grab.
Again, no one would even know that guy had ever been the Never Mind baby if he hadn’t been bragging about it himself, for decades.
I just look at it this way (and am repeating what others have said here)… if Nirvana bought some photo shoot of this guy or highlighted his art show in the 2016 or paid him a few hundred grand… suddenly this wouldn’t be child porn.
The fact that they didn’t pay him off is why he is saying it’s child porn… and that’s just basically extortion.
Not to mention, Nirvana as a legal entity doesn’t really even exist anymore. Krist has been with like, eight other groups, Kurt’s dead and all his heirs had nothing to do with this shoot, Dave’s with the Foo Fighters now and has been with them longer than he was with Nirvana… and the rest of the ship of Theseus worth of band members have been with a bunch of other groups too.
So yeah. I get his frustration that he didn’t get paid off, but you can’t just call someone child pornographers because they didn’t pay you off.
Thanks for the extra context. That does make him seem less gross to me. The article I read that quote in was from the article Rob posted about it last year:
and didn’t include the part about people asking him about it, which I also find gross, personally.
He’s still trivializing child porn victims with this lawsuit, though.
This, I can get behind. And it would put a whole lot of you tubers and so called “mommy bloggers” out of business.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.