[jordigh]

The WTFPL is approved both by OSI and the FSF, both of whom had lawyers look at it. It looks like they do know what it means.

I'm more of a GNU GPL guy myself, but the WTFPL isn't a bad license.

Edit: Ah oops, OSI did not approve WTFPL. Oh well.

[reubenmorais]

In addition, OSI does not recommend using CC0 for software: http://opensource.org/faq#cc-zero

[agwa]

They don't approve of WTFPL either...

[reubenmorais]

You're right, I was fooled by the GP comment who said they do.

[agwa]

This lawyer disagrees: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8104407

He even points out that using it could get you sued due to the lack of a warranty disclaimer by default.

I've heard other stories of companies refusing to use WTFPL-licensed code, and that alone should discourage you from using it if you goal is really to let anyone use the code with no hassle.

Edit: the FSF doesn't recommend it (in contrast to CC0, which they do recommend if you want a public-domain license): http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#WTFPL

[_puk]

Sounds like we need a "It's not my f-ing problem" licence.