5 ms·

What's unclear to me is how I would be running afoul of the licensing terms if I used the non-free version of the JDK to develop Java software. Because "develop

What's unclear to me is how I would be running afoul of the licensing terms if I used the non-free version of the JDK to develop Java software. Because "developing, testing, prototyping, and demonstrating [my] Application" is exactly what I'd be using the JDK for.

marcolussetti 8y ago
Not a lawyer, but my assumption is that the clause state you can develop an application, but cannot run it in production/sell it.
- doodpants 8y ago
  Not a lawyer either, but the license says that the "Programs" (meaning the JDK) may only be used for these purposes. Once I write my application, it will be running on the JRE, not the JDK.
  - grogenaut 8y ago
    Iirc there is no jre in 11, just jdk, also Oracle is not dumb they likely have a clause covering your "loophole". Finally why would you develop on Oracle jdk and run on open. Seems like an easy way to get bugs.
    - doodpants 8y ago
      Ah. I wasn't aware there was no separate JRE.
- posterboy 8y ago
  Easy loophole, infinite open beta, continuous integration, rolling release. At which point, with which release would it turn from beta to commercial full gold master? Slippery Slope that. A better wording would be "if you make money, we want a cut, or you get a cut, got it?"