[meteorite-list] Don't buy the hair! subtitle: What flew up Neil Armstrong's butt?

[Darren Garrison]

This gets my vote for the biggest "most in need of a sense of humor in the feild of space science"
award since Apple had to rename a project to "Butthead Astronomer"


http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/space/06/01/armstrong.hair.ap/index.html

Neil Armstrong threatens to sue barbershop over hair clippings
Wednesday, June 1, 2005 Posted: 11:32 AM EDT (1532 GMT) 

CINCINNATI, Ohio (AP) -- Apollo moon mission astronaut Neil Armstrong has threatened to sue a
barbershop owner who collected Armstrong's hair after a trim and sold it for $3,000.

Armstrong, the first man to walk on the moon, used to go to Marx's Barber Shop in Lebanon about once
a month for a cut. That stopped when he learned that owner Marx Sizemore had collected his hair
clippings from the floor and sold them in May 2004 to a collector.

"I didn't deny it or anything," Sizemore said. "I told him I did it."

Sizemore said Armstrong asked him to try to retrieve the hair, but the buyer did not want to give it
back.

"I called Neil back and told him that," Sizemore said. "Then I got this letter from his lawyer."

The letter contends that the sale violated an Ohio law designed to protect the rights of famous
people. It threatens legal action if Sizemore does not return the hair or contribute his profit to
charity and asks Sizemore to pay Armstrong's legal expenses.

Sizemore, who said he already spent most of the $3,000 on bills, told the lawyer who sent the
letter, Ross Wales of Cincinnati, that he will not pay. Wales did not return a call seeking comment.

Sizemore said he sold the hair to an agent for John Reznikoff, a Westport, Connecticut, collector
listed by Guinness World Records as having the largest collection of hair from historical
celebrities. The collection, insured for $1 million, includes hair from Abraham Lincoln, Marilyn
Monroe, Albert Einstein and Napoleon.

Armstrong commanded NASA's Apollo 11 mission to the moon in 1969. He left the space program in 1971
to teach aeronautical engineering at the University of Cincinnati. He seldom appears at public
functions or grants interviews.






Oh, and for those not in the know, here's info on the Sagan incident I mentioned at the beginning of
the article:

http://idiot-dog.com/humor/butthead.html

OK for Apple to Call Sagan 'Butt-Head Astronomer'
The Computer Lawyer

SECTION: CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS; Tort; Vol. 11, No. 8; Pg. 32

HEADLINE: OK for Apple to Call Sagan 'Butt-Head Astronomer'
Apple Computer Inc. did not defame the prominent scientist Carl Sagan by calling him a "Butt-Head
Astronomer," a Central District of California court ruled, because the term did not imply any
assertion of an objective fact such as professional incompetence. Carl Sagan v. Apple Computer,
Inc., CV94-2180 LGB (C.D. Cal. 1994).

Apple Computer's project managers routinely assign code-names to products in development. In 1993,
one of Apple's project managers assigned the code name "Carl Sagan" to a personal computer it was
developing. After learning that his name was being used, Sagan had his attorneys write a letter to
Apple demanding it cease. In response, the project manager changed the computer's code-name to
"Butt-Head Astronomer." Sagan filed suit in federal court for libel, infliction of emotional
distress, invasion of privacy, unfair competition, and violation of the Lanham Act and California
law on the use of likenesses.

Apple argued that the term was an opinion, protected under the First Amendment. Judge Lourdes G.
Baird agreed. She noted that a statement of opinion can only form the basis of a libel action if a
reasonable fact-finder can conclude that the statements imply an assertion of fact. Judge Lourdes
[sic] held that "one does not seriously attack the expertise of a scientist using the undefined
phrase 'butt-head,'" and that a reader aware of the context would understand the project manager was
retaliating in a humorous and satirical way.

Judge Baird also ruled that Sagan could not recover for infliction of emotional distress, noting
Sagan is a public figure and that a public figure could only recover for infliction of emotional
distress by showing that the publication contains a false statement of fact made with actual malice.

However, Apple lost its motions for a more definite statement of Sagan's Lanham Act claim. Apple had
argued that Sagan's complaint had admitted that his name was only used internally at Apple, and
could not, therefore, have been "in commerce" as required by the Act. Judge Baird noted that Sagan's
complaint only asserted that Apple's attorneys had stated that the name was only used internally.
Finally, Judge Baird denied Apple's motion to strike Sagan's invasion of privacy count as redundant
in light of the right of publicity claim. She noted that the former asserted an additional request
for punitive damages, and that the other redundant elements did not prejudice the defendant in any
way.