Overwatch License

Modification of the source code is only allowed if your competitive rank in Overwatch is higher than the maintainer's.

The [true] Unlicense License
Copyright (c) No one. You shouldn't be seeing this.

Permission is hereby denied, without possible charge, to any person illegally obtaining a copy of
this software and associated documentation files (the "Software") to not interact with the Software at
all, not look at the source code at all, and to not possess a copy, INCLUDING not having the right 
to run, execute or use the Software in any way.

The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall not be included in
copies or substantial portions of the Software, since you aren't supposed to see this anyway.

THE SOFTWARE IS **NOT** PROVIDED AT ALL, WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN ALL EVENTS SHALL THE
AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS HAVE A RIGHT TO HOLD YOU LIABLE FOR BREAKING THE
LICENSE, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM,
OUT OF OR IN ILLEGAL CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE 
USE OR OTHER QUESTIONABLE DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE
``

I like the hot potato license, but granting commit rights only to inhabitants of the milky way galaxy is too restrictive.

Assuming you are gay, have never committed a crime in your life and have illegally used software licensed with the "Be gay, do crime" license, you would have committed a crime, but because you did, you would have been following the license, which would mean you havent committed a crime, creating a paradox

sltar License

Using this software requires giving your first child to the author so that they can "immolate it to the devil".

i'm feeling the urge to hide this clause in one of my projects. i'd change it to Rumpelstiltskin though.

in a community I was in a while ago, there was a license someone used called the "anyone but Jeff license" which banned people named Jeff from using the Minecraft mod

Isn't the "passive aggressive licence" just MIT?

For comparison: comments about other licenses are available at https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html

The Nuclear Waste Software License is brilliant. Not only does it make the right impact when publishing random write-only code, it's legally BSD so lawyers won't be up your arse about it. In fact, it only strengthens the warranty disclaimer.

Be Gay Do Crimes licence - seems to be good for gay people who live where being gay is a crime, unless one wishes not to out themselves by their choice of licence

Winamp Collaborative License

A "source-available" license that says you can't fork the project, which means it is illegal to click the fork button on GitHub (which is a violation of the GitHub ToS) and also makes it impossible to create any pull requests without push access to the original repo. Source

Oh yeah, I remember that whole fiasco from a few months back.