> I agree, and that's precisely the sort of software I've seen using the WTFPL license. I don't think it's right to characterize this as reckless. "Reckless" i

> I agree, and that's precisely the sort of software I've seen using the WTFPL license. I don't think it's right to characterize this as reckless. "Reckless" is too strong, but shortsighted or poor judgment might be more appropriate. If you're using a software license for anything, whether it's a hobby, a helpful library, or a potential business venture, that means you're distributing your work to the world. What benefit do you gain by using a poorly understood license that is effectively the same as widely used permissive licenses?