Anonymous wrote:
I don’t care if he got a tattoo of Nevermind and bragged about being the baby on the album cover. I still think that cover was exploitative. I hope he wins.
Anonymous wrote:it's definitely an interesting case. Yes, maybe money grab. But I think there will be some interesting discussion around minors and consent as the mommy blogger kids get older and process how exposed their lives are/were.
Anonymous wrote:It’s one of my favorite albums and I think it’s a money grab. But honestly I have always thought the album cover was in very poor taste and I could ever loved it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:He just wants some money fell it. They should settle and give him some. He made the best argument he could.
+1. No way he is getting 2.5 million, but they should give him something to make it all go away.
Anonymous wrote:He just wants some money fell it. They should settle and give him some. He made the best argument he could.
Anonymous wrote:He also tattooed "Nevermind" in huge letters on his chest. Total money grab.
At the time that the album was made, Nirvana were not known, and not rich. I do think that in good faith they should have given something for all the profit they have earned over the years, but the man isn't necessarily entitled to it. He clearly has enjoyed the 'fame' and even tried to make himself look like Kurt Cobain, and if he's truly mad at anyone, it should be his parents. The whole child exploitation thing seems like complete BS.
