Thank you for pointing out this mistake. Of course, there also is nothing technically preventing anyone to ignore the GPL; the license itself is "just" some legalese.

I do believe, though, that these kind of references (from paper into the real world) often introduce surprising gotchas. Especially when they are intended to address some future (mostly unknown) issue.

The designated anchor point (person, technological artifact, legal entity) is itself often more likely subject to change than the thing it's trying to govern. Persons may be hit by a car, registries may expire, companies may go bankrupt. Governing laws may change. Countries may cease to exist...

The LAW® has literally millennia of dealing with these kinds of things - especially with regards to physical property, the definitions of which may refer to a king of a country that hasn't existed for five hundred years. You can find all sorts of examples, look to the US southwest or Europe or any country that has been controlled by another for a time, and then stopped.