With non-commercial I mean: I'm fine if companies use it internally, as long as they don't start selling the software itself or use it in a marketed software product.
There is a lot of online advice for licensing open-source software, but I am not interested in releasing the source code, and the software does not include any GPL-licensed components.
Obviously: IANAL - as in: totally clueless.
Does the question even make sense? Do binaries even need a license? To me one thing that would make it require a license is the "non-commercial use". Another thing might be that I want people to be able to use it, and sometimes the absence of a license, the legal uncertainty that brings, is inhibitive.
Any advice, discussion or links are very much appreciated.
If people need to exercise any of the exclusive rights under copyright, including making copies (which most software does to work) some license is needed, though the license may be implied by the manner in which the software is made available rather than by explicit text.
Whether a license is necessary, and whether if so the effect you want requires an explicit license, is a legal question that you probably want to go to a lawyer for. But, generally, if you want to release it publicly and have it both clear and enforceable that it is allowed to be used in certain contexts but not others, you probably are going to want an explicit license, because otherwise it is almost certain that either want you want to allow won’t be clearly allowed or what you want to be prohibited won’t be clearly and enforceably prohibited.
Only if you want to have a say about how people use the software.
Most software include a license. For example, Windows end user license agreement (EULA):
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/Useterms/OEM/Windows/10/UseT...