Huh? The GPL already requires an appropriate copyright notice.[1] This is not the same as the BSD advertising clause [2]. I don't see how attribution is any different.

[1] http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.en.html... [2] http://www.gnu.org/licenses/bsd.en.html

In section 7, Additional Terms: b) Requiring preservation of specified reasonable legal notices or author attributions in that material or in the Appropriate Legal Notices displayed by works containing it; or...

Author attributions seems to be quite clearly considered as compatible with GPLv3.

Since when is MIT license not compatible to GPL? The FSF seems to think it is: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#Expat