@geekmaster: Oh, PD is fine if _you_ use it :-) It's just that our legislation doesn't allow _me_ to license my stuff under it. While not directed at software, the CreativeCommons initiative has done a great job to try and "translate" a set of license to lots of legal environments. They have created something "as near as possible" to Public Domain for their CC0 license for Germany, for example.
When I get funny, I create something like my "know-what-your're-doing-license", which you can find e.g. here:
http://cccgoe.de/wiki/2wiki.sh (it features a bash script that facilitates uploading images into a MediaWiki, it's been a two-hour "distraction project" of mine since a friend whished to be able to upload images from his N900 phone that can trigger scripts upon taking images.
But in general, I much prefer good old MIT/BSD. I'm still a believer in the greater good, and do have some vague anarchist ideals, so I'm not too fond of the whole GPL thing. I have made some "bad" experiences, too: this Android app
http://www.androlib.com/android.appl...ader-npFE.aspx is something that I created and open-sourced (later versions with some help of another person). Someone went on and started to sell it for money on the Google Market - well, that was not my intention. But the GPL does not prevent that. Well, it would have enforced better credit than that guy gave, but it doesn't prevent anyone from selling your software that you intended to give away for free. I was thinking about creating my own licence that excluded commercial distribution. But this would be a minefield in a lot of legislations, too.
In most cases, however, using third-party software will force me into the GPL one way or another. So lots of things I write end up being GPL.