After the Oracle lawsuit, why should people feel safe believing that Oracle will respect the terms of the license instead of trying to extract more money and subject you to a costly lawsuit?
GPL with Classpath exception covers you well enough.
Google skipped on the GPL license, so they don't get the benefits of that license.... unlike all Java users.
Google had the opportunity to own Java, decided it wasn't worth the money, so now they should suffer the long due penalty.
If a company has the option between OpenJDK and its "free" license or paying Oracle for a different license, why would anyone feel safe choosing the former, given that when you deal with Oracle, you deal with the risk of wasting as much money or more to defend yourself in court than the price of Oracle's paid option? Open source licenses are only as good as as the belief by the licensing party that the terms of the license mean anything.
If you don't want to give money to Oracle, there are plenty of other companies to choose from, including Amazon, IBM, Microsoft, Alibaba, SAP, Azul.
You listed OpenJDK as a viable "free" option. Defend it, or don't, but stop trying to pivot the conversation while pretending that changing the subject is a valid answer answer to the thing that was asked.
Your favourite search engine has the answer.
If you feel like trolling, that is your problem, bye.
Facts: We have evidence that Oracle doesn't care about the actual terms of GPL. We have evidence that they're willing to subject people to legal turmoil if Oracle decides they want you to pay instead of using the "free" license.
> Defend it, or don't, but stop trying to pivot the conversation while pretending that changing the subject is a valid answer answer to the thing that was asked.