> It’s better to use 0BSD or MIT-0 instead, which grant permission to use the software without weird exceptions.
0BSD and MIT-0 are zero attribution ultra-permissive copyright licenses, aka public domain-equivalent copyright licenses.
CC0 is a public domain declaration with a fallback copyright license for jurisdictions (such as Germany) which don't recognise public domain declarations.
There is a big technical difference between the two, in some jurisdictions (such as the US) – CC0 puts something in the public domain, MIT-0/0BSD technically doesn't. A real difference in theory, maybe not much in practice.
If the author really cares about the public domain part, something like Unlicense is a better option than MIT-0/0BSD – an actual public domain dedication, without the patent/trademarkconcerns which exist regarding CC-0.
If they want to make the maximum possible number of people happy, they could even use disjunctive licensing, e.g. CC-0 OR Unlicense OR MIT-0
0BSD and MIT-0 are zero attribution ultra-permissive copyright licenses, aka public domain-equivalent copyright licenses.
CC0 is a public domain declaration with a fallback copyright license for jurisdictions (such as Germany) which don't recognise public domain declarations.
There is a big technical difference between the two, in some jurisdictions (such as the US) – CC0 puts something in the public domain, MIT-0/0BSD technically doesn't. A real difference in theory, maybe not much in practice.
If the author really cares about the public domain part, something like Unlicense is a better option than MIT-0/0BSD – an actual public domain dedication, without the patent/trademarkconcerns which exist regarding CC-0.
If they want to make the maximum possible number of people happy, they could even use disjunctive licensing, e.g. CC-0 OR Unlicense OR MIT-0