Standardise the MIT license

[mmmguitar]

We have licence scanners for compliance and its not able to identify the licence for goose which is causing some issues.

It seems a silly one but the LICENCE file for MIT appears to be non-standard in the way it's adding a title in the middle of the expected licence.

As far as I am aware the MIT licence should be formatted:

<copyrights>
<legals>

Where as the goose licence is:

<copyrights>
<MIT Licence title>
<legals>

Which appears to break the definition of the licence. Most open source libs appear to put the licence title at the top, leaving the licence below it in tact, i.e.:

<MIT Licence title>
<copyrights>
<legals>

Heres a link to SPDX's + open source initialtive definitions for the licence: https://spdx.org/licenses/MIT.html
https://opensource.org/license/mit/

So the change request here is just to just swap the title to the top before the copyrights.

As an aside I often see people using "The MIT License (MIT)" for the title. As far as I can understand there's no real standard on that. There appears to be a historic quirk on the licence file being called after what it was to a generic named "LICENCE" file with a title the top to denote the licence, and that's developed as the norm its seems.

[mfridman]

Fixed by #648