Confusing License Specified in Repository

[ghost]

There is no clear license specified in this repository (neither a LICENSE.md file, nor a License section in the README.md file). However, in the package.json file, the "license" field is set to "ISC". But at the same time, there is no actual ISC license text anywhere in the repository. Even the "author" field in the package.json file is set to an empty string. There may be certain legal issues with the license defined in such an ambiguous way, both for the author (@samerbuna) and for anyone who wants to use any part of this code.

If you don't include any license, U.S. copyright law states that the most restrictive copyright terms apply (meaning "All Rights Reserved"), which means that no one can legally reuse, share, and/or modify any part of this code. The fact that the "ISC" license is specified in package.json, but there is no ISC license text anywhere creates a very confusing and ambiguous situation as to whether or not the ISC license applies.

Can you please properly, clearly, and consistently define what type of license you want this code to be released under within this repository (preferably as a LICENSE.md file)? Thanks.

@samerbuna