Alexander McQueen is dead and all this is is some relative/ staff member trying to get money that is NOT due to them.
I have a question for the family member or staff that is trying to start this lawsuit,
WHERE WERE YOU WHEN HE WAS IN SUCH PAIN THAT HE KILLED HIMSELF?
Instead of starting a lawsuit over a commercial you should be assessing your failure to protect your family member after the death of his mom.

I think there are a lot of simularities, but I don't think they should be able to sue over it. That's just retarded. I think the company is just trying to earn a few extra bucks without having to actually work for it. People are way to sue-happy these days. Unless the Cadbury commercial caused them to lose money somehow, there are not entitled to anything.

he should be sued for a crappy ad

I find the image disturbing and nightmarish at best. At first sight, it reminds me of a piece of desiccated marine detritus drifting in a current, as of some loose tattered bloodless pale flesh floating lifelessly by. If I were to see this while snorkeling or diving, I'd steer clear of it. So, whom ever the creator was that put this piece of "Art" together was, in my opinion, is either demented. And for Cadbury to use it, must also be equally demented too. This ad does nothing to entice me to buy Flake. In fact, it actually reposes me from buying it. I give it two grodies: Eow-Yuk !! and E-gads!!

Actually, they should pay them not sue them. Anyone who would remember the Kate Moss holigram would be reminded of it in the Cadbury ad possibly creating a sale or two for A. Mcqueen's line.

It looks like a jellyfish with a human head to me. And it doesn't remind me of a hologram at all. I say no infringement here.

To D- I thought the same thing, exactly!! It looks like something disgusting, part of something formerly living, that is floating in the water.
Barf

First off the commercial sucks, I mean it's visually stimulating but it doesn't really promote the product that well. I mean it looks like a fabric commerical.
Secondly, to answer the question - you can't sue over an idea or a concept.

Silly ad for a candy bar. Nothing about this ad would encourage me to run down to the corner store and buy one.

It's a beautiful ad, although I wonder what it has to do with chocolate - even Cabury Flake.
The McQueen estate should purchase it and use it for their own benefit.

The ad is artistically lovely. Not a rip off. A style. And I agree with Mark. The family is out for a buck off the back of their deceased relative for whom they did nothing to intervene in his misery and eventual death. Leave it be.

I personally think this commercial stinks for a candy bar ad. Doesn't relate at all to something you eat; looks more like some underwater creature, at first.

Very unappealing use of a dramatic image for a candy bar, unless it's maybe made from jellyfish.

Ugh! It looks like microscopic views of something that lives in old carpets......

Actually the commercial that I have the biggest problem with is the Broadview commercial where every home invader is a white guy. Pretty f-ing sick of that sh*t because we all know that the stats don't back that up. Every white person needs to go to Broadview's competitor because of it.

The flake ad seems to have tentacles...the McQueen gang ... testicles... Go figure!

Not pretty. Yucky!

D said it extremely well! This ad is nightmarish at best. Up close, the ruffles are attractive; from the long shot, they look like something writhing and rotting under the sea. I haven't seen the Cadbury Flake, but I don't need to see it to feel that the image relates to the candy bar about as closely as a fish relates to a bicycle. I have no desire to try this candy bar.