Former PhD supervisor faked results and submitted a corrigendum two years after publication During my PhD studies, I published a journal article (one of total four) in a prestigious journal of my field. I gave my codes to my PhD supervisor, but he messed up things in the lab and lost it (I also didn’t care and lost, for I am pursuing different directions).

Two years after publication, my PhD advisor wanted to commercialize my PhD work and wanted me to develop the codes again without willing to credit me for my efforts. I found his emails harassing, malicious and blackmailing and stopped responding him by directing his emails to spam folder. 

Out of desperation, he himself developed some codes and submitted a corrigendum in which he clearly tried to push an agenda to suit his commercialization efforts (I know what I am talking, believe me on this). This included falsifying earlier findings just because he didn’t understand my work and cannot implement it and thus, presented an alternate algorithm which clearly is inferior. From my experience with that algorithm, I know from his description of implementation in the corrigendum that the results he presented are clearly made-up. 
My PhD advisor has basically faked results in a corrigendum to suit his commercialization efforts.  

What are my options ?


Can I convey it to the journal ? (I have already conveyed to the journal that this corrigendum is submitted without my approval.)
Can I offer my ex advisor to re-implement but giving me the due credit?
What should I do?
If you have incontrovertible, hard evidence that the adviser is falsifying data for personal gain, and can demonstrate as such beyond any reasonable doubt, you may have an ethical obligation "to science" to pursue this.  

Outside of this, it is probably best to walk away. You already stated that you 'don't care' and even sent his emails to spam. Do you even want to be associated with this work (assuming he wants to re-do things and give you credit)? It sounds like the work would be significant and the rewards fairly minimal. Besides, based on your description, if he 'cannot implement' this commercialization attempt, there's little to gain.