I preserve old software by asking copyright owners (often one author) to release the source code under an Open Source License, GPL or MIT. In many cases the source is gone, but the binaries still exist. Often they were released under some home made license 20 years ago. If I'm correct the binaries could be released under MIT, which would give them a world wide recognized license, keeping the copyright owner, but also make it possible to do derived works for the user in clear legal way? (I know that much of this would fall under "abandonware" but that is not a legal term). So the question is - is MIT a correct choice for binaries where the source code is lost?
There's no reason you couldn't do this and I think it may be your best option, though I'm not aware of any well-known uses of MIT/Expat in this way. I wonder if a non-code license like CC-BY would work better, or CC0 if you don't need attribution.
Generally 'freeware' developers make their own licenses and there is little standardization. The closest example I can think of would be Binpress, which is a somewhat common license generator that can make both free and nonfree licenses, and it's been used to distribute binary files before.
You may also be interested in the Floodgap Free Software License, which was designed for both binary and source distributions and allows modification.