I would like to write some software, in my free time, and release it under GPLv3. As I understand it, this would imply that any software that uses that code must also abide by the terms of GPLv3.
I work on a project which is closed source, and while I would like it to be free software, I certainly do not have the power to make it that way. But the code I write would be helpful for my work (in fact my motivation for writing it is to help at work, but I am being careful to avoid writing it in a professional capacity as I know that this sometimes can cede the copyright to my employer).
As I understand it, if my organisation were to adopt my code without my permission, it would be a clear violation of the license terms. My question is: Am I free to give an exception in this case, given that I hold the copyright for this program? Either explicitly, or by simply never mentioning that the software is free in the first place.
I'm guessing the answer is "yes", since I think that the burden of enforcing a license is probably on the person who owns it. But I'm not sure. Could someone clarify?