OK, I can agree with almost everything in this post. I am sorry I alleged that you were not aware of some of the details I posted, I know you're a CPAN author and was a bit surprised, but I apparently misunderstood your post, so I apologize.
Just a nit ;-):
..issue becomes fuzzy at this point
Yes, but it only becomes fuzzy in the other direction. If I find a CPAN module without a license file I cannot assume that I am (legally or ethically) correct to assume more rights than a standard CPAN license would give me, I can only assume that I have been given the same or less rights by the author.
I agree with everything you say about practical enforceability and also about the desirability of lawyer involvement. But (going back to why I posted my question in the first place) Moron was advocating as good the practice of taking parts of CPAN modules and integrating them into his company's codebase. That is neither ethically nor legally correct IMO (regardless of enforceability) unless he has the permission of the author or is following the license (which in this case is an implicit one). If he doesn't fulfil these requirements he also exposes the original author to the legal risk I described in my last post. Which is why I asked whether he'd taken care of this side of things. Because it's still important to do the right thing, regardless of whether you will be caught/punished.
Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it. -- Brian W. Kernighan