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. ______________________________________________ Meteorite-list mailing list [email protected] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
