If there is no strong support for removing this property from the profile, I would propose to leave things as they are.

I think the property would benefit from some clear guidance as to what content is expected int the referenced document (all covered by the definition of the class ):

• a statement about the intellectual property rights (IPR) held in or over a Resource,
• a legal document giving official permission to do something with a resource (seems to be already covered by dct:license) ,
• a statement about access rights (which would bring this property into the focus of issue licenseDocument #34 ).

Please note that there is a discussion on this issue also in the Dataset Exchange Working Group (DXWG) at W3C in the context of the revision of DCAT; see w3c/dxwg#114.
The definition at DCMI may be read to imply that anything that is a statement about rights of whatever kind can be the object of dct:rights.

Proposed resolution | Remove dct:rights from Distribution.
This resolution will be taken into account for the next semantic release scheduled for November 2018.
The issue remains open for comment until September 2018.

It is proposed to keep it in the model for now. Note discussion at DXWG, see: w3c/dxwg#114.