I wonder what developers think?

[MinecraftEarthVillage]

maomao1996/vitepress-nav-template#44

(You can use a browser to translate)

The general thing is that the author of a small website wants to change the copyright statement because he uses the same webpage template as me, but Vitepress is yours, and we only have the right to use it. I will also use your technology in the webpage.

They tried to change the ownership of their own websites to themselves, so as to "report" other gh-page websites with the same technology.

I went to tell Maomao, and he was against it, but it was you upstream, so I wanted to mention it to you

（I don't know if there's a language barrier to this passage）

[brc-dd]

the author of a small website wants to change the copyright statement

They can change the copyright statement of "their" work however they like. BUT both "vitepress" and that "vitepress-nav-template" are licensed under MIT. You can use both however you want. Using templates doesn't count as plagiarism.

so as to "report" other gh-page websites with the same technology

I highly doubt that GitHub will take down some site/repo just because they are using "the same technology". Even if they do, please create a support ticket with them and let them know your side of the story.

[MinecraftEarthVillage]

You mean the QQ group? After that, they didn't seem to mention the web page. They were more keen on attacking other people's Minecraft servers. I'm not in their group, but there are my people there. If anything happens, they will still tell me.

lol

[brc-dd]

Yeah. I mean you can easily dispute the DMCA notice. I don't know about other providers, but GitHub doesn't (or at least shouldn't) take down something for using same MIT-licensed template and build tools.

[brc-dd]

Based on the messages received from the other party, I want to clarify some things:

1. Copyright on Templates:
   vitepress and vitepress-nav-template are both licensed under the MIT License. MIT License allows using and modifying the code, but not claiming ownership. This means you are free to use, modify, and distribute vitepress and vitepress-nav-template for any purpose, including commercial use, ideally, with attribution.

2. Copyright on Content:
   postyizhan claims MinecraftEarthVillage copied their written content. If true, postyizhan can file a DMCA takedown notice with GitHub. The copyright for the content within one's website (e.g., text, images, etc.) belongs to them and they have the right to protect their content with appropriate copyright notices.

3. DMCA Takedown/Dispute:
   GitHub removes content upon receiving a valid DMCA notice.
   MinecraftEarthVillage can dispute the claim if they believe the use is fair.

I hope everyone can talk things through and try to find a solution that works for everyone. There's not much I can do directly, but I think GitHub will look at both sides of the story and make a fair decision.

[MinecraftEarthVillage]

Haha, this is really a misunderstanding. The reason why I will suddenly create a page that looks exactly the same is that there are some typographical problems in the content of the page created by postyizhan (especially the ultra long pictures are not folded and difficult to view), and some controversial articles are taken out of context and screenshots are missing. At first, I wanted to upload the "new data" I sorted out, and postyizhan also gave me the warehouse permission. Just because I started to contact GitHub and markdown recently, I made some mistakes. He thought I was not suitable for writing, so he finally revoked my permission.

What about the content I didn't write? Pull requests， But postyizhan rejected my application, so I could only keep my previously modified entries in my fork warehouse, and remove the contents I had not edited (they will soon disappear. Although the buttons on the table of contents page have not been deleted completely, most of them will not point to the substantive content)

[brc-dd]

In that I case I really think you both should just talk it out. GitHub supports branch protection rules, they can probably enable them for main branch and need reviews before merging. If things don't work out, you can probably create separate site with your new content.