Free Neil Armstrong's hair!

[Cylinder]

Neil Armstrong threatens to sue barbershop over hair clippings (http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/space/06/01/armstrong.hair.ap/index.html)


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.

[Cylinder]

I voted no. As much as I respect and admire Armstrong, when he left his barber without the clippings he abandoned his rights to them. It is pretty tacky for his barber to sell them using his name. Neil's next barber should have to waive his rights to any clippings or Neil should carry the clippings with him when he leaves if he is still concerned about them.

[mopc]

So that's what the Space Age came down to. Everyone back in 69 (8 years before I was born) thought in 2005 we would be discussing the next mission to Alpha Centaury, or how to govern the settlements of Pluto. But no, we are discussing Neil Armstrong's hair clippings. That's the most exciting human space news of the year. Congrats humanity, we really did it. We really let the future die! (now turn off dramatic mood)

By the way a voted no! He left his hair there, what the heck. Famous people should police themselves about that beforehand. I always keep my hair and nail clippings in a bag :lol:

[jfribrg]

I also voted no.

[The Bad Astronomer]

I read this earlier today, and may blog about tonight if I have time. Interesting. Maybe he should send Buzz Aldrin after the barber. :)

[Cylinder]

Maybe he should send Buzz Aldrin after the barber. :)

=D>

[Swift]

I read this earlier today, and may blog about tonight if I have time. Interesting. Maybe he should send Buzz Aldrin after the barber. :)
That was a cutting remark. :wink:

[mickal555]

I voted "Yes"

If I was famos and someone was selling my hair, I think i'd be pretty ticked off too.

[Maksutov]

Stay tuned, folks! Despite the potential involvement of Buzz Aldrin, this could get hairy!

http://www.cosgan.de/images/smilie/figuren/c010.gif




BTW, I voted no. At his age, Neil should be happy just to be visiting a barber! :wink:

[Van Rijn]

I voted "Yes." If it was my hair, I'd want a cut of the profits.

[kucharek]

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0601052armstrong1.html

I'm not sure if you really abandon your hair to anyone when you leave it at the barber shop. When you go to the barber, you silently make a contract, usually including that the barber is ordered to dispose of the cut hair. But I don't think that means that he can do whatever he wants with it. I guess, a barber also couldn't just sell your hair to a wig maker without your consent.

Harald

[hippietrekx]

I voted no.

Last June, I cut half a meter of my hair off (hy hair was one meter) and donated it to an organization that makes wigs out of human hair and sells them for up to $3,000 to kids with cancer. Some of the kids get special deals or are sponsored by strangers so they can afford a wig, but the organizaion still charges a lot of money (which goes to the wig-makers, publicity, and other expences. In the end, it is a non-profit organization) for what was once my hair.

And I don't care, why should Neil? It's just hair! What was Neil going to do with it? Make a hair-ball? :o

Maybe that barber finally got that operation for his mother... or a big screen TV... both equally important, did Neil ever think of that? (don't kill me, it's a joke!)

--htx

[kucharek]

Just as I wrote about wigs...
Point is, you donated your hair, knowing what was going to be done with it. How would you've felt if you had learnt later that the hair you thought went into the dump was sold for some money, making profit with parts of your body without your knowledge or consent?

And what is bought from the money isn't relevant. When I rob a bank, it doesn't matter if I do it for a trip to Hawaii of for paying an operation for my mother.

[01101001]

I'm the first other.

From a quick read of a digest of Ohio statute enactments on Right of Publicity (page 72 of this PDF (http://www.lsc.state.oh.us/digest/99digest.pdf)), yeah, he controls the commercial application of his likeness and name.

If the barber had sold the hair without a description, fine; then he took nothing from Armstrong. He'd only be selling his own garbage. Since he sold it using Armstrong's name, he appears to have infringed Armstrong's rights.

So, yes, he had an expectation of privacy, actually an expectation to control commercial use of his persona, and no, he shouldn't get his hair back. He should get the monetary damages (or statutory damages) proscribed by the statute.

[Melusine]

I voted no. It's just not that big of a deal (hair), and all famous people should realize that whatever they touch, whether it's a cup at a restaurant or their hair clippings becomes someone else's bizarre collectable. I can understand if he's annoyed, but just let it go, Neil. Life is short. Life is bald, too. #-o

[Sylas]

If the barber had sold the hair without a description, fine; then he took nothing from Armstrong. He'd only be selling his own garbage. Since he sold it using Armstrong's name, he appears to have infringed Armstrong's rights.

So, yes, he had an expectation of privacy, actually an expectation to control commercial use of his persona, and no, he shouldn't get his hair back. He should get the monetary damages (or statutory damages) proscribed by the statute.

This hits the nail right on the head. It is not the physical hair itself that is it issue.

(But I voted yes, he has an expectation of privacy, since I think the distinction between this and "other" is too fine to bother about.)

Armstrong's letter indicates that he would be satisfied if profits from the sale were donated to charity, and legal costs covered. This is a fair request as well. The excuse that the money has already been used to pay bills makes not a scrap of difference.

Cheers -- Sylas

[kucharek]

Now celebrities will have to take care of crazies approaching them with scissors now they know there is a market to sell this stuff.

[Maksutov]

Now celebrities will have to take care of crazies approaching them with scissors now they know there is a market to sell this stuff.
I trust you're still talking about hair. :wink:

[Conspiracy Cam]

If Neil was smart he would make a deal with the barber and split the profits.

[R.A.F.]

I don't usually call people names, but just how stupid is this barber? Think about it for a second. Once a month, he would spend about 15 or 20 minutes with the First Man to Walk on the MOON!!!

...and he "threw it all away" for a measly 3000 dollars.

...what a dope...:roll:

[kucharek]

If Neil was smart he would make a deal with the barber and split the profits.
If Neil would like to make lots of easy money from his fame, he could do lot of silly things. But he decided not to go the easy way.

[Heid the Ba']

From a quick read of a digest of Ohio statute enactments on Right of Publicity (page 72 of this PDF (http://www.lsc.state.oh.us/digest/99digest.pdf)), yeah, he controls the commercial application of his likeness and name.


I don't think this does apply, the barber is making a factual statement of previous ownership, not seeking an endorsement by Armstrong. If he tried to use the connection in advertising etc, I think there would be a case under the statute but that wasn't what he did.

It is a pretty classless thing to do though.

As always I'll hide behind the caveat that I know nothing of Ohio law, I did ask a former colleague for their opinion since this is more their area and they agree with me. Ok I know it is hearsay based on little knowledge but it is the best I've got. :D

[R.A.F.]

It's just my belief, but I can't help but think that the barber took what was essentially "garbage" and converted it for monetary gain without Neil's consent.

It doesn't matter if it's "legal" or not...its just plain wrong!

[Astronot]

I’m with Harald. In operating a shop, the barber has some degree of fiduciary responsibility to his customers. By that I mean that in order for him to provide his service, hair cutting, he must be allowed to do something that the client would ordinarily not do, let someone have your hair. This requires him to disclose to you any intention to use the hair in a manner that could be attributed to you.

My business, financial advising, is loaded with fiduciary responsibilities, and I am ethically and legally bound to keep information about my clients affairs private. Away from a client, I can discuss information only in a way that doesn’t identify my client, such as when consulting with other professionals or presenting examples at a lecture.

If the barber were to collect cut hair and resell it anonymously, that would not be a problem because it cannot not be attributed to any one individual, but to take advantage of his clients good name in this manner is unethical. Armstrong’s actions are proper. He probably cannot force the purchaser to return the hair, but he should pressure the barber to disgorge any income from the transaction.

I also voted "no"...If you want to keep your hair-clippings, take carrier bag to the Barber's? 8-[

[jfribrg]

I recall a story about a person who managed to snag a few clippings of Ronald Reagan's hair. In case you don't recall, President Reagan had a full head of dark hair well into his 70's. This person had the hair analyzed with the purpose of confirming the rumor that Reagan dyed his hair. As the story goes, there was no dye whatsoever in the hair. Reagan's dark hair was all-natural.

[Tuckerfan]

I don't usually call people names, but just how stupid is this barber? Think about it for a second. Once a month, he would spend about 15 or 20 minutes with the First Man to Walk on the MOON!!!

...and he "threw it all away" for a measly 3000 dollars.

...what a dope...:roll:Agreed. In reading this story, the first thing that popped into my head was The Rape of the Lock (http://eserver.org/poetry/rape-of-the-lock.html). Armstrong's a very private man, after he left NASA, he stayed out of the limelight until fairly recently. No doubt the only reason he's been so public of late is that he's trying to use what little time he has left to push NASA back to the Moon. The poor man's been hounded so much by Sibrel, that he's had to take a restraining order out on him. I hope for all our sakes that this incident doesn't drive Neil back to the shadows again.