Sorry, I meant it is essentially the same as placing the software in the public domain (unless I completely misunderstand the license). But, you are right.
On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 18:18 -0500, Julian Marchant wrote:
> > WTFPL aka no license
>
> WTFPL isn't "no license". It's a lax permissive license, which is
> completely the opposite. ("No license" means full copyright restriction.)
>
> The FSF doesn't recommend using it for software; I guess that's
> because of the language in the license. But there's no need to fork a
> WTFPL-licensed program to change the license.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
