4 ms·

Who cares about the new features? The new license makes it almost impossible to use Java without some form of payment to Oracle.

aw1621107 7y ago
> The new license makes it almost impossible to use Java without some form of payment to Oracle. Do you have a source for this claim? It sounds a bit extreme, to say the least, and I had the impression OpenJDK was licensed using fairly standard terms.
- Spinfusor 7y ago
  It's mostly FUD: it's only relevant for the Oracle JDK; it doesn't apply to OpenJDK (or the other open distributions by other orgs).
  - aw1621107 7y ago
    Glad to hear that; I thought I remembered reading something like that back when the license change was first announced, but I wasn't sure if something else had changed in the meantime.
  - cxr 7y ago
    It doesn't help that multiple Oracle/Sun folks—including people like McNealy—said under oath that they don't believe that the licensing permits you to make commercial use, even if you opt for the GPL version.
    - pjmlp 7y ago
      At the time Google screwed Sun, the GPL version did not cover the deployment into embedded platforms, only desktop and servers. OpenJDK license is another matter.
      - cxr 7y ago
        I don't know what you're referring to, but FSF does not allow the GPL be used in such a way that the four freedoms are compromised by the licensor imposing additional restrictions.
        pjmlp 7y ago
        Except that there are plenty of dual licenses with GPL-exception clauses and Java was one of them back then. It is up to the courts and copyright holder to decided what to do with their IP.
        cxr 7y ago
        First, you didn't describe an exception; you described additional restrictions. But now you're pivoting to talk about exceptions. These are fundamentally different things. One enlarges the set of actions a recipient is free to do relative to what vanilla GPL allows. This is permitted (and in the case of the classpath exception, endorsed) by FSF. The other attempts to shrink the size of that set by denying the user things that the GPL would otherwise allow. The FSF simply does not permit the GPL to be used in that combination (and there would be extreme contrast in your last sentence and the failure to recognize the FSF's say in this). And secondly, you've yet to substantiate your claim that Java was ever distributed with such GPL-modifying restrictions.
        pjmlp 7y ago
        Well, I let Gosling speak about Google's then https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYw3X4RZv6Y&feature=youtu.be&t=57m42s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYw3X4RZv6Y&feature=youtu.be...
        cxr 7y ago
        How about a straightforward response, rather than trying to change the subject again? What's more, I've seen this interview multiple times. Listening to Gosling stutter and be coy is not illuminating in the least. He has no idea how to answer the question he was asked, much less what's being discussed here now. Can you substantiate your claim or not?
elygre 7y ago
Use the open jdk versions. It’s like centos instead of RHEL.
PedroBatista 7y ago
Well we all know that's not true, player.. :) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenJDK https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenJDK
stevetodd 7y ago
Ugh, false. This document goes into quite some detail explaining the situation and all the many options you have to not paying Oracle: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nFGazvrCvHMZJgFstlbzoHjpAVwv5DEdnaBr_5pKuHo/preview https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nFGazvrCvHMZJgFstlbzoHjp...
imtringued 7y ago
That only applies to the official java builds from Oracle. Distro maintainers can always compile their own openjdk binaries.

aw1621107 7y ago

> The new license makes it almost impossible to use Java without some form of payment to Oracle. Do you have a source for this claim? It sounds a bit extreme, to say the least, and I had the impression OpenJDK was licensed using fairly standard terms.

Spinfusor 7y ago
It's mostly FUD: it's only relevant for the Oracle JDK; it doesn't apply to OpenJDK (or the other open distributions by other orgs).
- aw1621107 7y ago
  Glad to hear that; I thought I remembered reading something like that back when the license change was first announced, but I wasn't sure if something else had changed in the meantime.
- cxr 7y ago
  It doesn't help that multiple Oracle/Sun folks—including people like McNealy—said under oath that they don't believe that the licensing permits you to make commercial use, even if you opt for the GPL version.
  - pjmlp 7y ago
    At the time Google screwed Sun, the GPL version did not cover the deployment into embedded platforms, only desktop and servers. OpenJDK license is another matter.
    - cxr 7y ago
      I don't know what you're referring to, but FSF does not allow the GPL be used in such a way that the four freedoms are compromised by the licensor imposing additional restrictions.
      - pjmlp 7y ago
        Except that there are plenty of dual licenses with GPL-exception clauses and Java was one of them back then. It is up to the courts and copyright holder to decided what to do with their IP.
        cxr 7y ago
        First, you didn't describe an exception; you described additional restrictions. But now you're pivoting to talk about exceptions. These are fundamentally different things. One enlarges the set of actions a recipient is free to do relative to what vanilla GPL allows. This is permitted (and in the case of the classpath exception, endorsed) by FSF. The other attempts to shrink the size of that set by denying the user things that the GPL would otherwise allow. The FSF simply does not permit the GPL to be used in that combination (and there would be extreme contrast in your last sentence and the failure to recognize the FSF's say in this). And secondly, you've yet to substantiate your claim that Java was ever distributed with such GPL-modifying restrictions.
        pjmlp 7y ago
        Well, I let Gosling speak about Google's then https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYw3X4RZv6Y&feature=youtu.be&t=57m42s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYw3X4RZv6Y&feature=youtu.be...
        cxr 7y ago
        How about a straightforward response, rather than trying to change the subject again? What's more, I've seen this interview multiple times. Listening to Gosling stutter and be coy is not illuminating in the least. He has no idea how to answer the question he was asked, much less what's being discussed here now. Can you substantiate your claim or not?

elygre 7y ago

Use the open jdk versions. It’s like centos instead of RHEL.

PedroBatista 7y ago

Well we all know that's not true, player.. :) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenJDK https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenJDK

stevetodd 7y ago

Ugh, false. This document goes into quite some detail explaining the situation and all the many options you have to not paying Oracle: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nFGazvrCvHMZJgFstlbzoHjpAVwv5DEdnaBr_5pKuHo/preview https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nFGazvrCvHMZJgFstlbzoHjp...

imtringued 7y ago

That only applies to the official java builds from Oracle. Distro maintainers can always compile their own openjdk binaries.