A lawsuit against Nirvana – filed by a man who claimed his depiction as a naked four-month-old baby on their album cover was child pornography – has been dismissed for the second time.

A photo of Spencer Elden swimming towards a dollar bill on a fishhook had appeared on the cover of the rock band’s iconic album Nevermind in 1991.

But Judge Fernando Olguin threw out the case after ruling that no reasonable jury would consider the image pornographic, likening it instead to a “family photo of a nude child bathing”.

“Other than the fact that plaintiff was nude on the album cover, nothing comes close to bringing the image within the ambit of the child pornography statute,” he said.

Elden’s legal team did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Nirvana’s lawyer Bert Deixler said they were “delighted that the court has ended this meritless case and freed our creative clients of the stigma of false allegations”.

The defendants included surviving Nirvana members Dave Grohl and Krist Novoselic, late lead singer Kurt Cobain’s widow Courtney Love, and photographer Kirk Weddle.

The photo was taken at the Pasadena Aquatic Centre in California.

Read more from Sky News:
Broadway stars ready to strike
JK Rowling hits out at Emma Watson in fresh clash

Mr Elden first sued the band and its label Universal Music Group in 2021, accusing them of sexually exploiting him through the image and causing ongoing personal harm.

Judge Olguin initially dismissed the case in 2022 on the grounds that Elden’s claims were time barred, without addressing the substance of the allegations. However, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that decision in 2023.

In a 2003 Rolling Stone interview when he was 12, Elden acknowledged the photo and said he was “probably gonna get some money from it”.

However, in his August 2021 lawsuit, Elden argued that his injuries – including emotional distress, lost earning potential, and diminished enjoyment of life – extended into adulthood, allowing him to meet the statute of limitations.

The judge dismissed this claim, stating it would effectively allow Elden to sue Nirvana indefinitely.

Nevermind, which features the hit song Smells Like Teen Spirit, has sold over 30 million copies.

Monthly disposable income fell by £40 per person between Boris Johnson’s election victory in December 2019 and Rishi Sunak’s defeat in July 2024.

It is the first time in recorded British history that disposable income has been lower at the end of a parliamentary term than it was at the start, Sky News Data x Forensics analysis reveals.

Disposable income is the money people have left over after paying taxes and receiving benefits (including pensions). Essential expenses like rent or mortgage payments, council tax, food and energy bills all need to be paid from disposable income.

Previously published figures showed a slight improvement between December 2019 and June 2024, but those were updated by the Office for National Statistics on Tuesday.

There has been an uplift in the last year, although we’re poorer now than we were at the start of the year, and today we only have £1 more on average to spend or save each month than we did at the end of 2019.

That represents “an unmitigated disaster for living standards”, according to Lalitha Try, economist at independent living standards thinktank the Resolution Foundation.

Have things gotten better under Labour?

Disposable income has increased by £41 per person per month since Labour took office in July 2024. However, that masks a significant deterioration in recent months: it is lower now than it was at the start of 2025.

In the first six months of Labour’s tenure, disposable income rose by £55, a larger increase than under any other government in the same period. In part, this was down to the pay rises for public sector workers that had been agreed under the previous Conservative administration.

But the rise also represents a continuation of the trajectory from the final six months of the outgoing government. Between December 2023 and June 2024, monthly disposable income rose by £46.

That trajectory reversed in the first part of this year, and the average person now has £14 less to spend or save each month than they did at the start of 2025.

Jeremy Hunt, Conservative chancellor from October 2022 until the July 2024 election defeat, told Sky News: “The big picture is that it was the pandemic rather than actions of a government that caused it [the fall in disposable income].

“I clawed some back through (I know I would say this) hard work, and Labour tried to buy an instant boost through massive pay rises. The curious thing is why they have not fed through to the numbers.”

The £40 drop between Mr Johnson’s electoral victory in 2019 and Mr Sunak’s loss in 2024 is roughly the same as the average person spends on food and drink per week.

By comparison, since 1955, when the data dates back to, living standards have improved by an average of £115 per month between parliamentary terms.

Vital services, things like energy, food and housing, that all need to be paid for out of disposable income, have all increased in price at a faster rate than overall inflation since 2019 as well.

This means that the impact on savings and discretionary spending is likely to be more severe for most people, and especially so for lower earners who spend a larger proportion of their money on essentials.

Responding to our analysis, the Resolution Foundation’s Lalitha Try said: “Average household incomes fell marginally during the last parliament – an unmitigated disaster for living standards, as families were hit first by the pandemic and then the highest inflation in a generation.

“We desperately need a catch-up boost to household incomes in the second half of the 2020s, and to achieve that we’ll need a return to wider economic growth.”

Analysis by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, which also takes into account housing costs, says that disposable income is projected to be £45 a month lower by September 2029 than it was when Labour took office.

We approached both Labour and the Conservative Party for comment but both failed to respond.

Read more:
Is PM making progress towards his key policies?

How are Labour performing in other areas?

Labour have made “improving living standards in all parts of the UK” one of their main “missions” to achieve during this parliament.

Sam Ray-Chaudhuri, research economist at the Institute for Fiscal Studies, told Sky News: “Labour’s mission to see an increase in living standards over the parliament remains a very unambitious one, given that (now) almost every parliament has seen a growth in disposable income.

“Doing so will represent an improvement compared with the last parliament, but it doesn’t change the fact that we are in a period of real lack of growth over the last few years.”

As well as the living standards pledge, the Sky News Data x Forensics team has been tracking some of the other key promises made by Sir Keir and his party, before and after they got into power, including both economic targets and policy goals.

Use our tracker to see how things like tax, inflation and economic growth has changed since Labour were elected.

The policy areas we have been tracking include immigration, healthcare, house-building, energy and crime. You can see Labour’s performance on each of those here.

Click here to read more information about why we picked these targets and how we’re measuring them.

The Data and Forensics team is a multi-skilled unit dedicated to providing transparent journalism from Sky News. We gather, analyse and visualise data to tell data-driven stories. We combine traditional reporting skills with advanced analysis of satellite images, social media and other open source information. Through multimedia storytelling we aim to better explain the world while also showing how our journalism is done.

Labour swept into government with a promise of economic growth.

That promise contained another, more important, promise: this growth would unlock prosperity for ordinary people.

The government made it a mission to raise living standards in every part of the country.

Politicians know all too well that most people want to feel like they’re getting on in life. They want to get on the housing ladder. They want to be able to start a family, have a comfortable retirement or pass something on to their loved ones.

When this doesn’t happen, politicians often take the blame.

So, the promise to raise living standards is an important one in politics but it is not an ambitious one. Outside of the last parliament, which was plagued by COVID and an inflationary crisis, every post-war government has managed it. Will Sir Keir Starmer?

New analysis by the Sky News Data x Forensics team is sobering. Disposable incomes – that’s average income after tax – are barely higher than they were in 2019.

We are only £1 a month better off now than we were before the pandemic.

Labour got off to a good start. The Tories, in their final year, oversaw a £126 increase in disposable incomes (adjusted for inflation), determined as they were to get a grip on inflation.

The new government built on that by boosting earnings for public sector workers – including rail workers and doctors – who received chunky pay rises. However, the country is now going backwards. In the first six months of the year, disposable incomes have fallen by £43.

So, after a year in government, the signals are flashing red for the prime minister.

Not only are incomes stalling, but it comes after a long period of growing wealth inequality. The share of assets, such as property, owned by the richest in society is growing. No wonder people feel they can’t catch up.

Read more from Sky News:
The supercommuters taking 24-hour journeys to the office
US government shuts down after last-ditch funding votes fail

The problems are clear, but the solutions are more difficult.

The government also came into office with a promise to fix public services, without going on a borrowing spree. That means taxes have to play a part.

Labour promised it wouldn’t raise taxes on working people (income tax, national insurance or VAT) but it hasn’t cut them either.

Taxes are still at a generational high. This is eating into our pay packets and, in turn, living standards. This is before rents, utility bills and food take their share.

Meanwhile, Labour’s decision to raise money through business taxes is putting further pressure on inflation, as prices in the shops go up.

That means our money isn’t going as far as it could be. The prospect of further tax rises in the budget won’t help matters. But what alternatives does the government have?

More borrowing is risky. Cuts to public services are unpalatable. Economic growth – which could unlock pay rises – has been promised but may take time to bear fruit.

Better productivity is an eternal puzzle. The government could always tax differently, by targeting the wealthy, but the government seems to be worried that money could leave the country.

It’s a difficult bind and, if the government fails to turn things around, incomes risk slipping this parliament. That would be a disaster for Sir Keir Starmer.