On 03/07/18 18:44, Hen wrote: > Chris/Mark - is this a Legal (Chris) topic or a Brand Management (Mark) > topic?
Personally, I would not be prepared to sign a DMCA for this without legal advice. Even then I may not. Section 2 of the ALv2 effectively authorises this particular use. DMCA take down notices require a statement that the use is unauthorised. Signatories are required to declare, under penalty of perjury, that the take down notice is true and correct. I would hope that a readthedocs core maintainer would be able to resolve this. The abandoned project process also looks like an option - and would allow the project to benefit from serving current docs at what appears to be a popular place to look for them. Mark > > I’m hesitant to use a Trademark C&D for what’s in effect a lost account, > but that’s what readthedocs seem to be asking for. > > On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 3:15 PM Markham, Aaron > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, just bumping this issue again. Can we get a trademark C&D sent > to the readthedocs folks, so they'll go ahead and remove the > derelict website? It's still the #4 result in Google for "mxnet > install". > > What's Apache's process? > > Thanks, > Aaron > > On 5/16/18, 8:20 AM, "Hen" <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > It seems we (Apache MXNet) have an old documentation site posted at: > > https://newdocs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ > > and only the absent @Awyan has the permissions to the site. See > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/10409 for more > details. > > Raising this with readthedocs.org <http://readthedocs.org>, > we've been asked to submit a DMCA > request to take down the account: > > https://github.com/rtfd/readthedocs.org/issues/4042 > > Given our docs are Apache licensed I suspect it's really a trademark > takedown (confused users etc). Does anyone here have any > guidance with this > situation? Has anyone had this issue with readthedocs before? > Should we be > sending them a Trademark takedown request? > > Thanks, > > Hen > >
