Sure, but of minimal practical impact. The Free and Open Source community has long discouraged releasing software into the public domain, as it has clear drawbacks compared to just using a permissive licence. The legal intricacies of the public domain vary between jurisdictions. Not all jurisdictions even allow copyrights to be surrendered in this way. [0]
Licence-free isn't a concern. That isn't even close to Free and Open source software, it's the opposite: software that you aren't permitted to acquire, use, modify, or distribute. [1][2]
This is exactly what GP was talking about: entrenching a preference for one style of licensing over another. We all know what set of licenses the FOSS zealots would prefer for us to release code under, and those who release license-free or public domain software anyway typically do it with full knowledge of such arguments.
Licence-free isn't a concern. That isn't even close to Free and Open source software, it's the opposite: software that you aren't permitted to acquire, use, modify, or distribute. [1][2]
[0] https://opensource.org/blog/public-domain-is-not-open-source
[1] https://choosealicense.com/no-permission/
[2] https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/managing-your-reposi...