Shouldn't be surprising as it is the only OSS license that protects your right to repair by guaranteeing source code availability. FSF doesn't get enough credit for their foresight.
One thing I do think that people misunderstand is that a company can absolutely take your project and run it as a service -- they just have to contribute code back if/when they modify it.
The real canary is requiring signed CLAs.
I guess that's one way around the CLA -- they don't need one if they force all contributions to be MIT in a file most people wouldn't read.
In the end people the actual likelihood of someone making a credible legal threat is low so it all seems somewhat spurious but great way to go around the overt beacon that requiring CLA signing is.
[0]: https://github.com/OpenSignLabs/OpenSign/blob/bb846442ecbaa3...