Like others you're still missing the point, Doc. How can it be "desecration" or an unfitting "tribute to the dead" if Satchmo's estate gave KG the go-ahead? Why are people, especially Pat M, silent on the most important aspect of the "controversy"?
It's too easy to play cynical and ascribe the very worst of human nature to those in charge of Satchmo's estate ("oh, they only wanted the dollars") but it would be highly presumptuous. They might have been hugely chuffed that a bestselling modern musician wanted to bring their patriarch's memory to the forefront. Ever thought of that?
None of us know this, but to throw the whole thing on KG as though he did it all by himself with no input from Louis's nearest and dearest is clearly driven more by emotion than logic.