The Legal Horror Show: Why You Should Never Actually Use These Licenses
You've probably spent way too much time staring at license files, trying to decide between MIT, Apache, or GPL for your latest project. But what if the real question isn't which open-source license to pick, but rather how absurd can a license get before it becomes legally dangerous? That's exactly the rabbit hole ErikMcClure's "Bad Licenses" repository invites you to fall into—a curated collection of some of the most ridiculous, baffling, and genuinely terrible software licenses ever written.
What It Does
Bad Licenses is exactly what it sounds like: a compendium of absurd, funny, and downright bad licenses, each with a title and a summary of what the license actually does. The repository is organized as a table of contents, with each license having its own markdown file containing the full text and, when available, links to the original sources.
The collection spans a wide range of nonsense. There's the Passive-Aggressive License, which lets you copy, modify, or distribute code but explicitly doesn't let you run the program. There's the Hot Potato License, which transfers exclusive ownership of the entire project to whoever committed the last change. And there's the Overwatch License, which only allows source code modification if your competitive rank in Overwatch is higher than the maintainer's. The README is quick to add the unofficial legal advice: "Don't use these. Like, ever." It's a project that takes itself exactly as seriously as it should.
Why It's Cool
The real charm of this repository isn't just the punchlines—it's how each license reveals something about the weird corners of software culture and the limits of legal thinking applied to code.
It's a masterclass in legal absurdity. Some of these licenses are so poorly constructed they'd collapse in court instantly. The JSON License, for instance, is an MIT-style license with a morality clause stating "The Software shall be used for Good, not Evil." As the README points out, Good and Evil are subjective, making it legally unenforceable at best, and potentially giving the author grounds to sue you for any reason at worst. It's a perfect illustration of why vague moral language has no place in legal contracts.
Some licenses are accidentally (or intentionally) terrifying. The Protected Free To Use Software License is described as a "truly bizarre open-source license" with baffling restrictions, like not allowing anyone to redistribute binaries ever, for any reason (except on GitHub, apparently). The Bantown Public License takes it a step further by requiring you to commit criminal acts to use the code. These aren't just jokes—they're cautionary tales about how licenses can be weaponized or just horribly drafted.
Others are pure cultural artifacts. The Anyone But Richard Stallman License does exactly what it says: anyone can do anything with the software, except Richard Stallman, who cannot use or redistribute it in any way. The STRONGEST PUBLIC LICENSE is based on the WTFPL but adds the condition that you "APPRECIATE CIRNO AS THE STRONGEST IN GENSOKYO"—a reference that will either make you nod knowingly or send you down a Touhou Project wiki rabbit hole. These licenses capture specific moments in internet culture and preserve them in legal-ish amber.
It's a great conversation starter about open-source philosophy. Beneath the jokes, there's a serious point. The DON'T BE A DICK PUBLIC LICENSE lets you do whatever you want as long as you aren't a dick, giving examples of dickish behavior without defining what "harmful" means. The Buena Onda License releases code into the public domain but politely asks you not to do mean things with it. These licenses highlight the tension between the rigid legalese of traditional licenses and the community norms that actually govern most open-source projects. Most people don't contribute to open source because a lawyer told them to—they do it because they want to be good neighbors.
How to Try It
Getting started is as simple as browsing the repository. There's no installation, no dependencies, no code to run—just a table of contents and a series of markdown files waiting to be read.
- Head over to the repository
- Pick a license that sounds interesting—maybe start with the YOLO License, which the README describes as "420 blaze it ᕕ( ᐛ )ᕗ" and nothing else
- Read the full text of the license in its markdown file
- Follow the source links to see where these licenses originated—many are real, actually used licenses from real projects
- Share your favorites with your team. Then, for the love of all that is holy, do not actually adopt any of them
Final Thoughts
Bad Licenses is the kind of repository that's perfect for a lunch break or a slow Friday afternoon. It's a reminder that software licensing—usually the driest possible topic—can be genuinely entertaining when viewed through the right lens. Whether you're a developer who's ever wondered what would happen if you put "be nice" in your license file, or someone who just enjoys a good legal horror story, this collection has something for you. Just remember: it's a museum, not a toolbox. You can look, you can laugh, but you really shouldn't take anything home with you.
Follow @githubprojects for more developer tools and open source projects.