I think its a cool idea but I can see how families might be upset.

I'm not bothered, but yea - I'm not his family either.
Asked my husband, whose brother died when he was 17 - he said he wouldn't be bothered.

i don't really think they're "offensive"...maybe a little tactless. but it's not like they make me really upset.

When I first saw the picture, I thought they were trying to say wearing their shoes was heavenly....anyway, I understand the idea behind the advertisement and don't necessarily think its offensive, but probably in poor taste. I would not want to see my deceased loved one in magazine and t.v. advertisements - especially without my consent or forewarning. They could have achieved their objective by putting any unknown actor in an 'angel' costume, although I'm pretty sure they could have come up with a better way to show that their shoes are "made to last." At least they didn't show him in hell though...

Courtney is just pissed because they don't have to pay her to use his image in the ad. I'm sure she would be fine with it if she got a couple million for it.

Technically, wouldn't someone have to get compensated for using Cobain's image in an adverteisement? I just can't imagine any ad agency thinking this would be a good idea without first securing permission from someone involved in Cobain's affairs.

It's no worse than the Gap/Audrey Hepburn ads, except that unlike the Gap I'm sure Doc Martens won't be giving any proceeds to charity.

Smarler - I think they're getting around the money issue by showing the ads only in Britain. I read an article about it & it has something to do with Britain's copyright law. They don't have to have permission or compensate for the use of his image.

How can Doc Martens say they didn't have anything to do with the ad running? Wouldn't someone at DM had to have approved the ad? Or are the just in the habit of throwing money at an ad agency & not caring what the final product looks like? Seems strange to me.

It's not offensive -- maybe for diehard cobain fans and courtney love of course. But....who cares?

Theyre not as bad as Kanye West pretending to be Jesus.

I think they're totally offensive - and different from other ads starring dead stars - because IMO he would never have gone along with it when alive.

I think they're totally offensive.

I already answered this on MamaPop.com, but I agree, colormesticky, about them not being worse than the Audrey ads.

Who's to say Kurt wouldn't have gone along? The "grunge" scene died right after he did, maybe he'd be hurting for the cash! Haha, THAT was probably in poor taste, too, but nobody can say that he wouldn't - nobody knows or probably even KNEW him.

Anyway - they probably crossed a couple lines, but the biggest issue is that his dirty wife ain't getting paid. Lord knows Courtney would do ANYTHING for a buck.

all i know is that when i die, i don't want anyone using my face to sell something i'm not cool with. like green beans or something. but i'm not a celebrity so i think i'll be all right.
but i think these ads were in poor taste. what about his daughter? it'd just be weird to see your dead dad hawking shoes.

Kurt Cobain and everything that he did was offensive. He was white trash. Courtney is a scum and S-l-u-t. She will do anything or anyone for money. The biggest tragedy is that they brought another human being into this world to deal with their messed up lives. Or what was left of them.

Kurt probably would have loved the ad he was so messed up.

I find the ads offensive. Didn't Courtney just mention that she still wears her husband's pajamas to bed? These days, people should seek permission to use the images of others in promotional advertising--especially the relatively recently deceased.

Completely agree with Trixie, Courtney's just pissed she didn't get paid. The agency did pay for the photo rights through the license holder.

I think they're in bad taste. They are not like Audrey/ Gap ads because she is not dead in the ads.

Shockingly distasteful BUT the damn shoes got all the attention now!!!
And that's the point of advertising.

Shockingly distasteful BUT the damn shoes got all the attention now!!!
And that's the point of advertising.

I think it is wrong, but than often people use those who pass to sell things, it isnt the first time nor will it be the last

I wouldn't say "offensive" is a word I would use to describe it. More like wrong - simply due to the fact that you can't use a random person in your ad without permission...let alone a dead icon. Just an odd decision on someone's part.

i guess it was just in a little bad taste.

I dont know that offensive is the right word...i think they should have gotten permission yes but i dont really think it went that far...its not like they had them sitting in hell.

I think Doc Martin knew what they were doing and it would bring controversy. The ad has brought so much publicity to doc martin and I think they are willing to take the penalties.

i feel it was nice to see cobains face come up again, it reminded me of the art 27 wich has all the actors and artist that died at 27 kurt,janis,ect. But I understand loves' veiw i cant imagine how heart wrenching it would be to have a portrait of my husband that pasted away show up on an ad, and i having no idea.

I agree with Calibabi, I just think its tacky.

i like it but i think its offensive.

It is tacky!

I don't find it offensive, exactly, but fairly tactless. I can understand why families might be upset, but if no copyright laws were broken, what're you gonna do? And we don't know that he wouldn't have done it any more than we know that Audrey Hepburn would have done the GAP ads. I've certainly been way more offended by ads, articles, TV specials, etc. that nobody else minded at all so I'm not exactly crying for anyone in this relatively mild (if tasteless) advertising snafu. And Dr Martens didn't know anything about it? Yeah, right.

On the bright side, the image was like a walk down memory lane and suddenly I'm back at the eighth grade dance wearing my Docs and singing along to All Apologies. Those were the days.

they should have at least asked permission from the families

Their's a crazy feel to it.

I agree with calibabi, it's not really offensive...but it is a little tacky. Although, dead spokespeople are all over ads today--anyone seen the Orville Redenbacher t.v. spots? The poor man's been dead for years and they're making him out to be an idiot!!

What they should do is make new Maytag ads with the dead repairman 'cause the new guy just isn't doing it for me.

Tasteless to me too. Not necessarily "offensive".

I'm not buying that no one at Doc Martens knew about this. What's the saying "Any publicity is good publicity?"

Not at all.

Awful.

It was a very tacky and tasteless move. The Doc Martens company had to have something to do w/ it since it was though their advertisement agency; someone gave the okay. Doc Martens should give a apology, not to us but to Courtney and Francis.

Cute idea that understandbly can upset the families of the deceased.
Overall insensitive.

absolutely ridiculously offensive and absurd.

Oh stop whining!!!! There is nothing wrong with the ad and I think that the biggest issue is that those who think they should have been paid for the photo/endoresement weren't. Get over it. Kurt would like his memory to live on I'm sure. It's kind of like an ode to Kurt and Doc Martens. Nothing wrong with it!!! I like it. R.I.P Kurt Cobain. Still a legendary artist to me.

I'd say not very tasteful.