Can you believe it?

[Cleve van Leef]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-58327844

[Optimistic Nick]

Re: Can you believe it?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-58327844

Easy to dismiss as money grabbing, but I can sort of sympathise with the fact he was born into something he was famous for with no say in the matter. See also: royals.


doesn't mean he should get paid, rather that his anonymity might have been preserved until he was old enough to be told and could decide what to do about it.

[B. Oddie]

Re: Can you believe it?

Easy to dismiss as money grabbing, but I can sort of sympathise with the fact he was born into something he was famous for with no say in the matter. See also: royals.


doesn't mean he should get paid, rather that his anonymity might have been preserved until he was old enough to be told and could decide what to do about it.

He was anonymous until he started squawking about money.

[Rjk]

Re: Can you believe it?

Easy to dismiss as money grabbing, but I can sort of sympathise with the fact he was born into something he was famous for with no say in the matter. See also: royals.


doesn't mean he should get paid, rather that his anonymity might have been preserved until he was old enough to be told and could decide what to do about it.

I hate the way the US legal system (and probably others) works though. Instead of the argument being about what it is really about - presumably this guy thinks he should have been paid more money for the photo. But they have to trump up the claims to make it about Child pornography, which is clearly bogus.

[lardy]

Re: Can you believe it?

He was anonymous until he started squawking about money.

That's not correct. He did a re-creation of the shot for Rolling Stone when he was 10 - again, while very much a minor.

[Optimistic Nick]

Re: Can you believe it?

That's not correct. He did a re-creation of the shot for Rolling Stone when he was 10 - again, while very much a minor.

Indeed. I knew his name before this article.

I make it that he's claiming approx $2m. I'm not saying he should get it, but aren't the amounts claimed in these nonsense law suits in the US normally for far more? Why not go for $200m instead?

[Optimistic Nick]

Re: Can you believe it?

But they have to trump up the claims to make it about Child pornography, which is clearly bogus.

I'm by no means an expert, but if the dollar bill means we are supposed to see him as a sex worker.... What sort of "sex work" does he think can one get for $1?

[Rjk]

Re: Can you believe it?

I'm by no means an expert, but if the dollar bill means we are supposed to see him as a sex worker.... What sort of "sex work" does he think can one get for $1?

I guarantee nobody has ever seen that image and thought the baby was a sex worker.

[Optimistic Nick]

Re: Can you believe it?

I guarantee nobody has ever seen that image and thought the baby was a sex worker.

Yep. I imagine the thought process went something like this (on the financial side at least- I do have some sympathy for him and his involuntary fame):

- that lot made a fortune out of that album and the image of me on the cover is iconic. I'm famous and they benefitted so I want paying
- was there a contractual right to payment? Seems not, or maybe there was and they paid up way back when
- can I make some bullshit claim for retrospective image right violation or similar? Nope, that doesn't sound like a real thing
- can I sue them for damages because their..... negligence?.... caused me distress and has permanently affected my life? Sounds sketchy at best
- ah look- my dick is on it. Let's call them nonces and hope they pay up out of court to make it all go away. Problem with that is- a picture of a baby isn't sexual. So....
- [lawyers "brainstorm" for a day]: best we can come up with is- they didn't blur out your winkie and they stuck a dollar bill there, so maybe they are implying you are.... Dunno.... A low-budget sex worker or something? Right? Because nudity plus cash means prostitution? Let's give it a shot....

[NYCBlue]

Re: Can you believe it?

I guarantee nobody has ever seen that image and thought the baby was a sex worker.

But how would you feel if it was you?

[LeningradCowboy]

Re: Can you believe it?

That's not correct. He did a re-creation of the shot for Rolling Stone when he was 10 - again, while very much a minor.

Then he did another recreation when he was 20 and another one when he was 25.

[PhyllisStant]

Re: Can you believe it?

I notice the BBC cropped his knob out!

[light up the darkness]

Re: Can you believe it?

I notice the BBC cropped his knob out!

Made my eyes water just thinking about it.

[Feedback]

Re: Can you believe it?

If his parents did not agree to the use of the photo, then why is the claim they agreed to use a sticker to cover the willy area

[life on mars]

Re: Can you believe it?

Oh dear , Led Zeppelin must be trembling in their wallets see Houses Of The Holy album cover for reference.