I understand the concern, but MIT has been very intentional to signal the opposite of what you're worried about. Paperweight runs fully local. Everything works without any back-end or external services. No one can turn this into some paid SaaS to lock features. It already passes the walk-away test and there's literally nothing to rug and if the project ever goes into a direction you don't like you don't lose access or need anyone's permission.
While GPL theoretically gives you the same opportunity, I feel like it adds some overhead and potentially locks out genuine contributors.
And especially in the age of AI, code is cheap and if someone wants to build a closed Paperweight, the license is not going to stop them.