Nirvana sued over "Nevermind" cover photo

I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description ["hard-core pornography"], and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that.

1964 - Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart

Aside from the content, the article says that the band/label got no releases from the child’s parents. That in itself is a huge problem, and hard to believe a major label would market an album with no releases.

When I bought the record when it came out in the early 90’s, my first thought was “I wonder when the baby in the photo will sue the record company”. Now I know.  I will say the record cover is NOT child porn or any other kind of porn in my opinion.  That is like saying the statue of David is porn. 

Based on the articles, appears to be a not too bright millennial looking for a payout.

I wonder how much the attorney is feeding this guy?

At least in articles, the guy thought he should be " buddies" with the band.