Comment by ris

The way an author expresses and codifies their "wishes" over redistribution is through a license. If the current license does not accurately reflect the author's "wishes", it should be amended. Otherwise it is bogus to declare that this software is under the MIT license.

Having the author's wishes expressed in law ensures that all users can receive equal, non-discriminatory and predictable treatment, rather than having to walk on eggshells around what an author may or may not like you doing.