What Is Difference Between GPL And MIT License?
GPL is free software as well as MIT is, both licenses do not restrict you to bring together the code where as "include" is always two-way. In copyright for a combined work (that is two or more works form together a work), it does not make much of a difference if the one work is "larger" than the other or not.
The MIT License is compatible with many copyleft licenses, such as the GNU General Public License (GNU GPL). Any software licensed under the terms of the MIT License can be integrated with software licensed under the terms of the GNU GPL.
MIT License - Wikipedia
This is a lax, permissive non-copyleft free software license, compatible with the GNU GPL. This is a lax, permissive non-copyleft free software license, compatible with the GNU GPL. Some people call this license “the MIT License,” but that term is misleading, since MIT has used many licenses for software.
Various Licenses and Comments about Them - GNU Project
The main argument for MIT or any other permissive license over GPL is that more people may end up using your software. Even if all of the downstream user-developers don't open-source their contributions, many of them will. ... BSD is under an MIT-like license.
Which License Should I Use? MIT vs. Apache vs. GPL - Exygy
What is the difference between MIT license and Apache license?
MIT gives you only a copyright license. For Apache, you have to carry the license with you whenever you distribute it, and modified files must also have prominent notices that the files have been changed, and third, giving proper credit to the authors, and they include not just copyright, but patent and trademarks.
What's the difference between Apache v2.0 and MIT license ... - Quora