Tengen published a licensed version of this game in North America. After some disagreements with Nintendo, they published an 'unlicensed' version that did not contain Nintendo's seal of '$10 has been added to the cost of this cart'. After Tengen was court ordered to temporarily stop selling unlicensed NES games; Namco published yet a third version of this game. Namco's version was licensed (and cost more). Also, Tengen and Namco both originated with the old Atari company. They are separate companies, but Tengen and Namco continued to be business partners for many products.
All versions developed by Namco
パックマン, NAM-NPM-4500-02, JAN:4907892000025, published 1984-11-02 by Namco in Japan
Pac-Man NES-PQ-USA, UPC:0-31763-03111-6 published 1989 by Tengen in North America
Pac-Man (Unlicensed) TGN-003-PM, UPC:7-22674-02032-9 published 1989 by Tengen in North America
Pac-Man (Unlicensed) HES-PM, EAN:9312590130090 published 1990 by Home Entertainment Suppliers in Australia
Pac-Man NES-P7-NOE published 1990* by Nintendo in Germany
Pac-Man NES-P7-FRA published 1990* by Nintendo in France
Pac-Man NES-P7-UKV published 1990* by Nintendo in the United Kingdom
Pac-Man NES-P7-AUS published 1990* by Nintendo in Australia
Pac-Man NES-P7-USA, UPC:0-45496-43049-8 published 1993-11 by Namco in the United States
UPC:031763031123 ?
*Dated by the printing on the circuit board (manufacture date). Actual publishing date might be years later.
About Pac-Man
Are you sure that these date of 1990 for the PAL releases are the right ones? These are the dates I found on some websites, but the back of the box - may be NES-P7-UKV - states "1993" (see there) and I found a test of the game in a French review, supposedly made around the same time as the French release, that was made on July 1994.
Honesty, those dates are based on information found on the circuit board. Note that the sub-licensing involved for this game is complex and probably different per region perhaps even by country. It is entirely possible the carts were manufactured and warehoused long before the licensing deals expired at which time they were legal to publish. I know this happened with Via CPUs, Intel threatened Via with lawsuits for their designs and having manufactured them _before_ certain agreements had expired. But they were unsuccessful because Via wasn't _selling_ any and did not until the day the agreements expired.