[jjeaff]

They still need to be dragged a bit for copying someone's project. There is nothing against it in the license, but it is still pretty crappy to copy someone's offering and offer it up for free. Especially when you built your free offering on the back of the product you are killing.

[serial_dev]

I disagree. If you don't want anyone just come by, copy your product and offer it for free, don't release it under MIT. There is no "bro code" when it comes to software licenses.

[pwdisswordfish8]

By its very nature, the "bro code" refers to a "code" that doesn't actually exist, which makes your comment quite ironic. On measures of aptness, that makes it a comparison that's not apposite at all, but instead opposite.

[refulgentis]

It's generally considered bad form to privatize OSS for your own gain, whether there's a price tag on it on day 1 or not. Ex. VLCs issues over the years