I hadn't looked at your case specifically. I was more responding to what seemed that the user should never have to forward bugs to upstream.
Looking at it, it was indeed handled poorly (overall). Instead of being closed as Invalid, it should probably have been kept open and some indication that there was an upstream bug to be tracked in it (I'm a Fedora maintainer and an RHBZ bug can be associated with other BZs). That way, when the upstream bug is fixed, it can be asked to be backported or whatever on the distro side. Of course, I don't know the Ubuntu bug life cycle, so maybe this was "valid" under that, but I'd say if that was the case, the lifecycle needs fixed.