I don't think these people are mocking those who have died, or the potentially fatal outcome of the disease. Let's be honest, this new swine flu craze is to somewhat a degree a fad, and I think this is nothing more than an attempt to ride a fad. I doubt the people behind these efforts are cold hearted.
Why is it that when someone tries to "cash in on death" in a negative or satirical way they are evil, but when they do it in a "good" way, say by creating "support our troops" magnets, nobody cares? They seem equivalent to me.
While they're equivalent from a monetary perspective, the line between good taste and poor taste is gray and blurry. There's a big difference between a website that informs and makes money from ad revenue, and one that hocks crappy merch which makes light of a serious situation, especially to those affected.
It's a bit hard to see the distinction as it relates to this swine flu nonsense, since it's already an enormous, alarmist media circus. But imagine you bought a shirt in '91 that said "I survived the AIDS epidemic by wrapping my willy!" Would you wear it today? And how would you feel about where your money went?
Except that the TechCrunch story got killed by the editors and so this one is likely to get killed too. Just because it's rebadged as Washington Post doesn't make the content any better.
In any case, good luck to them.