(02-08-2017, 09:05 PM)pizzaroll1 Wrote: (and WTFPL isn't a license)

It actually is, explicitly defining Public Domain in countries which don't have implicit Public Domain. I deliberately choose the WTFPL for all of my (software) things for two reasons:

1) I don't care about what happens with my software as I don't make money with it anyway, nor do I want to have to care about that.
2) I don't intend to enforce anything. A license that contains "you must" and/or "you must not" is restrictive by definition. Even the ISC License - a generally fine license, I admit - violates this to some extent by forcing developers to add copyright and license things into their code which nobody will ever read anyway.

Which license - except the WTFPL - does this and why should it be a better choice?

edit: Also, WTFNMFPL if you live in one of those "I'll sue you" countries; but seriously, that's already too much text. Note that licenses should actually be read before using a software. Nobody will read this. (This also applies to the CC0 legal text.)

The WTFPL has exactly one easy clause. Beat that.