What are the key differences between MPL (Mozilla) and MIT licenses

Question

I'm relatively familiar with the MIT license. What are the differences (and similarities) between it and the MPL (Mozilla Public License)

• when releasing a new project as MPL (vs. MIT)
• or when using an existing MPL in an MIT project.

Other threads that I read about the MPL but don't help as they compare it to other licenses not the MIT

What's the difference between Mozilla Public License 1.1 (MPL) and Apache License

Answer 1

Not a full answer, but here is a difference. MIT is compatible with GPL, but MPL is not compatible with GPL.

Mozilla Public License (MPL)

This is a free software license which is not a strong copyleft; unlike the X11 license, it has some complex restrictions that make it incompatible with the GNU GPL.

X11 License/MIT License

This is a simple, permissive non-copyleft free software license, compatible with the GNU GPL.

source: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html

MPL is used by the Mozilla Foundation so I personally consider it more reputable than the MIT license. You might benefit from looking at other successful projects that use the Mozilla license.