alt Hacker Newsthis is completely and totally incorrect. MIT lets you redistribute, copy, and modify. It does not let you take authorship over the original work, even if just by way of changing git history.
Replies
This is untrue and if you thought about what you're claiming for a second this should be obvious. The MIT license let's someone do any of the things outlined there subject only to the need to retain the copyright notice and the license itself. I can grab MIT-licensed files and commit them to my repo (e.g., vendoring a dependency). I can also grab the files from an MIT-licensed commit and then the files from the next commit and recreate the history of that repo with myself as the author provided I've met those two conditions. I'm not saying this isn't _scummy_ behavior; it is! But its within the bounds of what the MIT license allows.
I don't think there's any legal concept of "taking authorship". What even is that?