TL;DR How can we replace the GPLv3 requirements of source disclosure + explicit license copy with something more subtle like "This work allows the users [...], and any derived work (recursively) allows all that too, independently of explicitly including this license.". Flexibilizing one to, for example, modify my work, compile and upload their binary, and be cool with it. But disallowing they to sue others that use their binary in any way. Does any license do that?
Background: For years, I've enjoyed creating private software projects to tackle my everyday problems, automate processes, and explore various ideas. Recently, I ended up taking an undergraduate course on computer science and got into academic research, which led me to start producing shareable software. However, so far, I have not found a software license that really satisfies my ideals of freedom. And given that I can choose "any" license to my software projects, I want to get the most possible out of it.
I would like to find a license that provides "the highest degree of user freedom", i.e., allowing all users to share, modify, re-sell, and even attempt to reverse-engineer any product or service derived from my software – Ideally, I would like to allow them to do almost anything, with one required exception presented below. Therefore without imposing unnecessary restrictions on them.
And I do see as any other user, a company that modifies my software and re-sells it. Therefore, while I recognize the benefits of open-source and will share the source code of my software projects, I'm not interested in mandating the sharing of source code for such derived works, or including my license file in their distributions, or requiring author credits, unless those very specific restrictions were indispensable for a copyleft license. The companies should be free to do as they please, like other users, with a single exception: The users of the derived work should have the same permissions as the users of the original work. Therefore, the companies (and any other user) should not be capable of restricting this. (copyleft!)
I am keen on exploring alternative legal license options to ensure copyleft but with less restriction to the (intermediate) users in relation to GPLv3/AGPL (e.g. not requiring source disclosure + explicit license copy). And I would like to ideally eliminate as much as possible the legal protections companies might claim over the derived works of my software with the aim of restricting their users. Without any safeguard, my concerns about preserving user freedom would reach only the direct users of my software. One possibility I thought of is expressed in tl;dr above, but I don't know if it really works.
Which existent licenses fit my criteria? I didn't find one in here. The CC0 license is similar to MIT in the sense that it apparently does not have a strong safeguard.