It would be boneheaded from a PR stand point, and it is insulting towards the GPL.

> Other license writers could also want to be treated specially.

You seem to have a serious gripe with the GPL. The GPL (its unnamed ancestor, to be pedantic) is the mother of open source licenses. It enables Freedom, with a capital "f" for its users, at the expense of obligations for people who distribute binaries. Liberal licenses turn the situation around.

Labeling the GPL, but not liberal licenses as restrictive is heavily biased, and simply does not reflect reality (since liberal licenses put implicit restrictions on binaries recipients).

I speak as a license author, BTW: https://github.com/pygy/The-Romantic-WTF-Public-License

The gradation of rights and privileges goes farther than "Public Domain, Sort of Public Domain, Restrictive".

The best way is to just have a dropdown that lists the name of the license.