> Doesn't GPL require the derived program to be called differently > unless the creator gets permission for calling it the same?
No. In fact, the GPL specifically allows you to modify and redistribute programs as-is, which I interpret as "keeping the same name etc". Trademark law might, but not the GPL. Consider the Fedora project, for example. The code is the same, which the GPL allows, but the name is different only because the term "Red Hat" is a trademark. So, they changed the name and artwork because of trademark law, not copyright law. The GPL *does* require proper attribution in copyright notices, though. I would hope that the pcb-3.0 web pages and documentation list all the contributors, other than pointing at the sourceforge web page. Their copyright notice summary is also missing some of the copyrights, although the sourceforge one is too (neither Dan nor I are listed in either README).
