Being the copyright owner of a piece of OSS doesn't give you control over every location where that software is hosted. For example, the developers of Python can't update the Python package in Debian's apt repo, Debian decides when to pull in new versions. (And if they want to add custom patches.) This doesn't mean Debian is declaring ownership of Python, they're simply distributing it in accordance with the license.
Just because NPM allows developers to self-publish doesn't mean that's a guaranteed perpetual right, and it doesn't mean MIT-licensed packages can't be published on NPM against the developer's wishes.
Licensing code under the MIT license (or any common FOSS license really) is the wrong move if you want to control where your software is distributed, and by who.
Just because NPM allows developers to self-publish doesn't mean that's a guaranteed perpetual right, and it doesn't mean MIT-licensed packages can't be published on NPM against the developer's wishes.
Licensing code under the MIT license (or any common FOSS license really) is the wrong move if you want to control where your software is distributed, and by who.