Re: inaccurate upstream copyright notice

[Ben Finney <bignose+hates-spam@benfinney.id.au>]

Thibaut Paumard <paumard@users.sourceforge.net> writes:

> He answered basically that the license itself is clearly stated
> (which is true), and that since it is GPL, the copyright is
> unimportant and I shouldn't care.

The copyright statement, if clearly false, AFAICT means that the
license statement is null, leaving the recipient with no license at
all.

A copyright statement is only effective if it's a statement by the
copyright holder. The best way to show that is to have the license
statement directly accompany a correct copyright statement in the
standard format, including "Copyright", years copyright began in that
work, and the correct name of the copyright holder.

-- 
 \         "I went to the museum where they had all the heads and arms |
  `\   from the statues that are in all the other museums."  -- Steven |
_o__)                                                           Wright |
Ben Finney