These kinds of licenses are cute, but you shouldn't use one as it just makes life harder on those that might adopt and patch back into your software. Additionally, in this case, the lack of a disclaimer of warranty in this particular cute license is ill advised.
The WTFPL is an all-purpose license and does not cover only computer programs; it can be used for artwork, documentation and so on. As such, it only covers copying, distribution and modification. If you want to add a no warranty clause for a program, you may use the following wording in your source code:
/* This program is free software. It comes without any warranty, to
* the extent permitted by applicable law. You can redistribute it
* and/or modify it under the terms of the Do What The Fuck You Want
* To Public License, Version 2, as published by Sam Hocevar. See
* http://sam.zoy.org/wtfpl/COPYING for more details. */
How does this make life harder for hackers? Explicit permission is given to do whatever the fuck [you] want to, which includes hacking.
Watch: I choose to ignore the warranty clause per clause 0. Also, since that clause exists, I can choose to apply it to other code I combine it with (unlikely, but its a dumb license that way)
Past that, I'm not convinced that due to clause 0 that it can be combined with other code, and I am of the opinion that more licenses are not good for open source development in general.
A responsible coder, given the desire in the wtfpl, would adopt a richard hipp style posture, or choose mit,bsd or apache.
Comments
These kinds of licenses are cute, but you shouldn't use one as it just makes life harder on those that might adopt and patch back into your software. Additionally, in this case, the lack of a disclaimer of warranty in this particular cute license is ill advised.
http://sam.zoy.org/wtfpl/ Why is there no “no warranty” clause?
The WTFPL is an all-purpose license and does not cover only computer programs; it can be used for artwork, documentation and so on. As such, it only covers copying, distribution and modification. If you want to add a no warranty clause for a program, you may use the following wording in your source code:
How does this make life harder for hackers? Explicit permission is given to do whatever the fuck [you] want to, which includes hacking.Watch: I choose to ignore the warranty clause per clause 0. Also, since that clause exists, I can choose to apply it to other code I combine it with (unlikely, but its a dumb license that way)
Past that, I'm not convinced that due to clause 0 that it can be combined with other code, and I am of the opinion that more licenses are not good for open source development in general.
A responsible coder, given the desire in the wtfpl, would adopt a richard hipp style posture, or choose mit,bsd or apache.