It would, assuming that magically doing so is depriving those who are under it of light waves. Illusion spells are already capable of creating images/light/mental images, why not extend that to the person under the invisibility? Furthermore, invisibility is not a perfect spell. It does not perfectly remove all traces (of visibility) from the target. Therefore, it does not perfectly bend light around them. It simply does so enough to make them harder to see.
The operative action of an inbisibility spell must be the removal of stimulus, because that's what the drain is based on. In other words, you aren't creating an overmasking image of nothing, because that (in a philosophical way) is not what the drain is based on. Nothing in that says that you aren't simultaneously as part of the effect creating images on the 'inside' of the invisibility that give insight into the world around. It just means that the primary action of the spell.
There are a lot of non-English-as-primary-language players of Shadowrun, which is fantastic. But in the english version of a primarily-english published game, the rules say (after several revisions of the game), that Invisibility bends light, see quotes above. If a third party translator makes an errata (even an approved one), that's great too, but the mainstream of the game hasn't changed.
Houseruling the spell to do something else is fine, but according to what I'm reading it bends light, and magic has been known to do sillier things. Heck, the magical movement spells (like slow) have nothing to do with force, they just deal directly with mass. To some extent, you already have to suspend disbelief to use the pseudo-science of magic.
EDIT: It could copy all light coming in one all sides and emit it out in the opposite direction. Granted, that's functionally the same thing, and it feels like it'd be a more complicated active phenomenon as opposed to bending the 'tracks' of that light, and then simply extending your own senses, or providing yourself a peep hole or something of the like. That would also explain how it's only a negative modifier instead of a perfect effect.
