Update copyrights to use "Paperclip Contributors"

[drueck]

Addresses issue #390

Updates the name of the copyright holder in each of the licenses to "Paperclip Contributors"

I wasn't sure if we wanted to change the dates to match? Or if there was a reason the dates on the two licenses were different, so I left that the same. Please let me know if there are any other changes that should be made. This is my first time contributing to this project, so please also let me know if there are any conventions I should have followed that I didn't. :)

[tiagolobocastro]

Thanks @drueck !
If I had to guess when the apache license was copied Ravi forgot to update it.
Let's update the date as well if you don't mind :)

[drueck]

Thanks @drueck ! If I had to guess when the apache license was copied Ravi forgot to update it. Let's update the date as well if you don't mind :)

Haha, yeah, that makes sense. Updated so they're both 2019.

[tiagolobocastro]

Thanks @drueck ! If I had to guess when the apache license was copied Ravi forgot to update it. Let's update the date as well if you don't mind :)

Haha, yeah, that makes sense. Updated so they're both 2019.

Sorry I meant to 2022

[drueck]

Sorry I meant to 2022

My bad. I wasn't sure what date was supposed to be used, so I googled it, and I misinterpreted what I read. It said something like that it should be the year the copyright was applied, which I took to mean the first year that the copyright was applied, but after further reading, I discovered that it means the year that it is currently applied, which I guess is the most recent year of changes/releases. 😅 So yeah, 2022 makes sense, and also you asked me to do that, so either way, updated. Sorry for so much back and forth on a tiny change. But thanks for the opportunity to contribute. I'll be taking a look at other code issues hopefully this weekend to see if there's something more useful I can contribute as well.

[tiagolobocastro]

Sorry I meant to 2022

My bad. I wasn't sure what date was supposed to be used, so I googled it, and I misinterpreted what I read. It said something like that it should be the year the copyright was applied, which I took to mean the first year that the copyright was applied, but after further reading, I discovered that it means the year that it is currently applied, which I guess is the most recent year of changes/releases. sweat_smile So yeah, 2022 makes sense, and also you asked me to do that, so either way, updated. Sorry for so much back and forth on a tiny change. But thanks for the opportunity to contribute. I'll be taking a look at other code issues hopefully this weekend to see if there's something more useful I can contribute as well.

No worries at all, I also wasn't entirely sure what the correct behaviour should be, though other projects seem to have also understood it like this.

Thank you!