[mcherm]

The only problem with that license is when someone uses it, then I make use of their code, then they sue me for copyright violation. Or my code kills someone in a hospital and the patient sues the guy who wrote the code. And they win in court because the license doesn't satisfy the requirements of the court.

Look, I wouldn't let a lawyer tell me how to write my Java code. And I won't let a non-lawyer tell me how to write a legally binding license.

(If a competent lawyer reviews this license and pronounces it good, then I retract my objection. If the license gets tested in court and wins then it gets my full support.)

[johnnyhead]

Thanks mcherm, this is the best counter-argument to the WTFPL I read all day. I am myself extremely curious about what would happen in these two circumstances: 1) someone uses my work and then sues me for copyright infringment; 2) my work harms people.

[mcherm]

Unfortunately, the legal system is intentionally designed in such a way that you can't easily satisfy your idle curiosity on that subject. You can ask a lawyer, who'll give you their best guess, but the only way to tell for sure is to get sued: there has to (with a few specialized exceptions) be an actual controversy before a court considers a question. This was (in programmer language) designed intentionally to protect scarce resources (court time) from certain kinds of denial-of-service attacks.