Oracle Java SE Subscription vs. Amazon Corretto: A Comparison for CIOs and Procurement

Overview: Oracle’s recent changes to Java SE licensing have significant cost and compliance implications for enterprises. Meanwhile, Amazon Corretto offers a free OpenJDK-based alternative. This article compares Oracle’s Java SE subscription model with Amazon Corretto, focusing on licensing terms, pricing, support, patching, and strategies to mitigate vendor lock-in.

Oracle Java SE Subscription Licensing Model

Oracle’s Java SE Universal Subscription is now licensed per employee – a fundamental shift from the old per-user or per-processor model. All employees count toward licensing, not just Java users. Oracle broadly defines ” employee ” as full-time, part-time, temporary staff, and even contractors or outsourcers supporting the business. An organization must license every employee for Java, even if only a small fraction uses Java SE. This model does not allow partial licensing (e.g., only 100 out of 5,000 employees).

• All-or-nothing coverage: If a company has 5,000 employees, the Java SE subscription must cover all 5,000, even if only 50 or 500 use Java. This “enterprise-wide” requirement simplifies compliance tracking but dramatically raises costs for organizations that previously paid only for specific users or servers.
• Unlimited usage (with limits): In exchange, Oracle allows unlimited Java use across the enterprise under the subscription (up to a high cap of 50,000 processors). You no longer count installations or CPU cores on a server – any use is covered as long as you license all employees. However, if you exceed 50,000 processors of Java deployment, additional licensing is required(an edge case for most companies).

Pricing Structure: Oracle’s Java SE subscription uses tiered per-employee pricing. The list price is $15 per employee per month for organizations under 1,000 employees, with volume discounts for larger headcounts. For example, a company with 500 employees would pay about 500 × $15 × 12 = $90,000 per year – even if only a handful use Java. Under the old model, that same company might have paid for just 50 Java users (~$1,500 per year). The new model thus leads to substantially higher costs by charging for “shelfware” (people who never run Java).

Oracle’s current price tiers (per employee per month) are approximately as follows:

Table 1: Oracle Java SE Universal Subscription pricing tiers. All employees (incl. contractors) must be counted.

Even with sliding volume discounts at large scales, costs become significant. For instance, ~40,000 employees would cost over $2.5 million annually for Java SE subscriptions. In short, Java has gone from a minor IT budget line to a potentially multi-million-dollar expense for large enterprises.

Licensing Requirements: The subscription covers internal use of Oracle Java SE across the organization as long as you pay for your total employee count. It’s a term-based license (not perpetual), so rights to use and receive updates are tied to an active subscription. If the subscription lapses, you lose access to updates and support, and continued use of Oracle’s Java in production could be a compliance violation. Oracle eliminated the older perpetual and processor-based licenses in 2023; new purchases must use the employee metric. Existing customers on legacy metrics (Named User Plus or Processor) cannot expand their usage under the old terms and face pressure to transition to the new model at renewal (discussed later).

Support and Updates: An Oracle Java SE subscription includes access to Oracle’s support services and periodic updates. Oracle provides quarterly Critical Patch Updates (CPUs) with security fixes and bug patches for Java (typically released in January, April, July, and October). Paying customers can download these updates via Oracle’s support portal, whereas non-customers lose access once public updates end. Oracle’s support roadmap guarantees long-term patch availability for each LTS release if you remain subscribed. For example, for customers, Java 8 is supported (via Extended Support) until at least December 2030 and Java 11 until January 2032. However, free public updates are time-limited. Oracle offered Java 17 updates under a No-Fee license only for three years after release (until September 2024); after that, any further Java 17 updates require a paid subscription. The same pattern applies to Java 21 (free updates for ~3 years post-release, then paywall). In effect, Oracle expects enterprises to upgrade to the latest LTS every few years or pay for a subscription to continue receiving patches on older LTS versions.

Contractual Support Obligations: With an active subscription, Oracle is contractually obliged to provide support services (such as technical assistance via Oracle Support) and deliver Java SE updates/patches during the subscription term. Note that this is a term license with no perpetual rights – if you end your subscription, you are not entitled to run newer builds of Oracle JDK or receive patches. (Oracle’s contracts typically do not grant indefinite usage rights for Java SE bits obtained under subscription; the right to use updates is tied to having support entitlement at that time.) From a contractual standpoint, Oracle also reserves the right to modify pricing and terms at renewal. There is no guarantee of renewal on the same terms – once your term expires, Oracle can insist on the new model or new rates. This lack of price protection means CIOs must plan for potential cost increases at renewal.

In summary, Oracle’s model offers comprehensive Java SE support at a high cost, with a broad licensing scope (all employees) and reliance on staying in Oracle’s good graces for renewals and updates. The next section explores Amazon Corretto, a popular free alternative many enterprises are evaluating to reduce this cost burden.

Amazon Corretto: OpenJDK Alternative with Optional Support

Amazon Corretto is a no-cost, OpenJDK-based distribution of Java provided by Amazon Web Services (AWS). It is fully OpenJDK/TCK compliant, meaning it passes the Java SE compatibility tests and should behave identically to Oracle’s Java SE in virtually all cases. Corretto includes the same core Java features without any Oracle proprietary add-ons, and Amazon uses it internally for thousands of production services, indicating its reliability.

Licensing and Cost: Corretto is released under the open-source GPL 2 with Classpath Exception license – free to use, redistribute, and modify with no licensing fees. There is no subscription and no per-user cost for using Amazon Corretto. Enterprises can deploy it on as many servers or endpoints as needed with zero licensing expense. From a cost perspective, this makes Corretto (and other OpenJDK builds) very attractive to CIOs, as it eliminates the Java runtime licensing line item. For example, the same 5,000-employee company that would owe ~$630k/year to Oracle (as shown above) would pay $0 in licensing for Amazon Corretto. Even if third-party support is purchased for Corretto, the costs are typically a fraction of Oracle’s subscription.

Support Options: Amazon Corretto comes with a long-term support (LTS) commitment from AWS at no cost. For many years, Amazon has pledged to provide regular updates (security patches and performance fixes) for each LTS version of Corretto, free of charge. For instance, Corretto 8 will receive updates until at least December 2030 (matching Oracle’s timeline for Java 8), Corretto 11 until at least October 2031, and Corretto 17 until at least 2029. Updates are planned quarterly and aligned with the standard Java release calendar. Amazon also states it will issue urgent fixes out-of-cycle for critical issues if needed. These updates are freely available to all users.

Amazon does not charge for support or updates for Corretto. However, it’s important to note the scope of Amazon’s support: AWS will support Corretto as part of its AWS Support plans for customers running Java workloads on AWS infrastructure. In other words, if you run Corretto on AWS and have an AWS Premium Support agreement, you can get help from AWS with Java issues similar to any other AWS-supported software. Outside of AWS environments, Amazon does not currently offer dedicated Corretto support plans. Organizations using Corretto on-premises or in other clouds can rely on community support (since Corretto is popular, there is a broad community and forum knowledge base) or engage third-party vendors for enterprise support if required. Several companies specialize in OpenJDK support (e.g., Azul, IBM, Red Hat, and others). They can provide 24/7 commercial support for Corretto or other OpenJDK distributions at far lower cost than Oracle’s subscription. For example, third-party Java support offerings often charge per server or JVM, allowing targeted coverage for the systems that need it – a much more granular approach than Oracle’s “all employees” subscription.

Feature and Patch Parity: Technically, Amazon Corretto is built from the same OpenJDK source code as Oracle JDK (minus Oracle’s branding). It includes all the same core features of Java SE. In earlier Java versions, Oracle’s JDK had a few commercial features (like Flight Recorder and Mission Control) that were not in OpenJDK, but those have since been open-sourced. Corretto even includes some enhancements: Amazon sometimes includes performance and security patches developed and tested in large-scale AWS deployments, even if those fixes are not yet in the upstream OpenJDK project. These patches aim to improve stability (e.g., better garbage collection tuning, memory fixes, etc.), and many contribute to OpenJDK over time. Importantly, Corretto passes the TCK (Technology Compatibility Kit), meaning it adheres to the Java SE standard. For enterprise applications, switching from Oracle JDK to Corretto is typically seamless. Most organizations report that applications run identically on Corretto vs Oracle JDK (after all, the bytecode and APIs are the same).

Patching and Release Cadence: Amazon Corretto’s patching cadence follows the Java community schedule. Quarterly updates are released for each LTS version (and the current release) in sync with the broader Java ecosystem. AWS coordinates these updates with the public OpenJDK updates, ensuring security fixes are applied promptly. Unlike Oracle, there is no artificial cutoff date for public patches – Amazon will continue releasing Corretto patches for the promised lifespan of each LTS (e.g., through 2030+ for Java 8/11) regardless of whether you have any support contract. OpenJDK distributions like Corretto and Eclipse Temurin provide security patches beyond Oracle’s public update cutoff for a given Java version. For example, Oracle stopped free public updates for Java 8 in 2019 and Java 11 after a certain point. Still, Corretto and others have continued to supply those patches to users without charge. This extended patch availability is a critical benefit for enterprises that cannot upgrade every 2-3 years – you can stay on an older Java version with Corretto and still get security fixes. In contrast, Oracle would require a paid subscription for the same privilege.

In terms of release cadence, Java’s six-month release cycle means new feature versions (e.g,. Java 21, 22, 23, etc.) come out twice a year, with designated LTS versions periodically (Java 17 in 2021, Java 21 in 2023, Java 25 in 2025, and so on). Amazon Corretto provides builds for all LTS releases (Java 8, 11, 17, 21, etc.) and often for the latest feature release. However, like most organizations, AWS expects enterprises to standardize on LTS versions for production. Oracle, Amazon (and the OpenJDK community) support LTS versions for many years. Still, Oracle’s free support window for an LTS is short (ending after the next LTS releases), whereas Amazon’s is long (typically 8+ years). In practical terms, an enterprise could choose a Corretto LTS version and avoid a forced upgrade cycle, enjoying up to a decade of patches on that version. At the same time, the model would push them to either pay or upgrade after a few years.

Cost and Support Comparison

To recap the differences in cost and support terms between Oracle Java SE and Amazon Corretto, the table below summarizes key points:

Table 2: Oracle Java SE vs. Amazon Corretto – Comparison of key cost, support, and licensing factors.

As shown above, Oracle’s offering provides strong vendor support and long-term updates only as part of a paid commitment, with a broad license scope and enforcement mechanisms. Amazon Corretto emphasizes open-source freedom: free usage and updates, with support decoupled (you choose if and how to get support). Next, we’ll discuss considerations for enterprises evaluating a migration from Oracle Java to Corretto, including potential use cases, risks, and strategies.

Use Cases for Migrating from Oracle Java to Corretto

Due to Oracle’s licensing changes, many large organizations are now looking closely at Java alternatives. Some common scenarios and use cases driving a migration to Amazon Corretto (or other OpenJDK distributions) include:

• Cost Avoidance and Reduction: The most obvious use case is to avoid the high subscription costs of Oracle Java. Organizations facing 2x 10x increases in Java spend are motivated to migrate. By switching to Corretto, a company can save hundreds of thousands or even millions annually in licensing fees. For example, a Fortune 500 firm that optimized Java usage and negotiated away Oracle licenses saved $2.5M in costs. If Java SE becomes a “multi-million-dollar line item” under Oracle’s model, moving to a free runtime like Corretto can deliver substantial IT budget relief.
• Standardization on Open Source: Enterprises with an open-source strategy may prefer to eliminate proprietary dependencies. Using an OpenJDK-based runtime (like Corretto) aligns with open-source policies and avoids vendor-specific binaries. This is especially relevant if your organization already uses open-source Linux, databases, etc. – dropping Oracle Java fits the pattern of reducing proprietary software reliance.
• Cloud and AWS Integration: For organizations heavily invested in AWS or planning cloud migrations, Corretto is a natural choice. AWS services (like Lambda, Elastic Beanstalk, etc.) use Corretto under the hood, meaning your Java applications in AWS already run on Corretto by default. Adopting Corretto company-wide can harmonize your on-prem and cloud environments. Additionally, if you have AWS Enterprise Support, Corretto issues on AWS can be handled just like any AWS service issue. This makes Corretto attractive to cloud-first enterprises and those using infrastructure-as-code with AWS-provided AMIs that include Corretto.
• Long-Term Support Needs (Avoiding Forced Upgrades): Some enterprises have stable applications that they prefer to leave on a specific Java version for an extended period (5-10 years) due to validation, regulatory compliance, or risk avoidance. Under Oracle, that scenario would require continuous subscription payments (since free patches would expire) or risky operation without security fixes. With Corretto, companies can stick with (for example) Java 11 until 2031 with ongoing patches, without paying fees or doing major version upgrades. This use case is about maximizing the useful life of an application platform without vendor pressure to upgrade.
• Development and Test Environments: Some organizations start by migrating non-production environments to Corretto to reduce their Oracle footprint. Development teams can use Corretto on their workstations and CI/CD pipelines, avoiding Oracle licenses. This lowers license needs if the organization limits Oracle Java to only production or certain products. It’s a common first step – e.g., Company X might first migrate 300 dev/test servers to Corretto while keeping Oracle Java on a few critical prod systems, thus immediately reducing the scope of Oracle usage.
• Leveraging Competition in Negotiations: Even if an enterprise ultimately stays with Oracle, having Corretto (and other OpenJDK) as a viable alternative is a strong bargaining chip. IT procurement can use the credible option of migrating as leverage to negotiate better pricing or terms from Oracle. We will discuss negotiation tactics later. However, the use case here essentially strengthens the enterprise’s position by developing a fallback plan (often a partial or phased Corretto migration) to avoid being completely at Oracle’s mercy.

Risks and Considerations in Migrating to Corretto

While moving to Amazon Corretto has clear cost benefits, CIOs and IT leaders should weigh certain risks and challenges:

• Compatibility and Testing: Corretto is Java SE standard-compliant, so most applications run without changes. However, any migration requires testing. Slight differences in JVM implementations or defaults (garbage collection algorithms, JIT compiler behavior, cryptography providers) could impact performance or functionality in edge cases. For instance, Amazon includes the Amazon Corretto Crypto Provider (ACCP) for better performance on AWS, which behaves slightly differently than the default JDK crypto engine. Such differences are usually minor, but enterprises should thoroughly test applications on Corretto before full deployment. This includes running regression tests, checking performance metrics, and ensuring that third-party libraries are fully compatible. In practice, issues are rare and typically solvable (e.g., adjusting a JVM flag), but the testing effort is necessary for migration.
• Vendor Support Gaps: By leaving Oracle, you lose Oracle’s official support for Java. You cannot call Oracle for a fix if a critical JVM bug or issue arises in production. Amazon’s free updates should cover known bugs, but there’s no dedicated support hotline for Corretto outside AWS. Enterprises must assess whether their internal IT team (or a third-party support provider) can handle Java runtime issues. Some organizations mitigate this by contracting a support vendor (such as Azul or Red Hat) for mission-critical systems while using Corretto. It’s also worth noting that if you use Oracle’s Java combined with Oracle middleware (WebLogic, Oracle E-Business Suite, etc.), Oracle might claim those products are only certified on Oracle JDK. This is less of an issue now since OpenJDK is the reference implementation. Still, risk-averse shops should confirm support policies for vendor applications when running on an alternate JDK.
• Operational Overhead: Without Oracle’s automatic updates, enterprises must track and apply JDK updates. AWS releases Corretto updates quarterly; companies should ensure they have a process (patch management cycle) to download and deploy these updates. This is a shift from an Oracle subscription model where you might rely on Oracle’s notifications and tooling. However, many organizations already self-manage patches for open-source components, so this is usually manageable. Containerized environments and DevOps practices can simplify distributing a new JDK version to applications.
• Migration Effort: Transitioning from Oracle JDK to Corretto across a large enterprise is a project. It involves identifying all Java installations (which can be surprisingly widespread: desktop apps, build servers, older apps, etc.), then replacing the JDK and testing. There may be thousands of instances. Automation tools and software asset management can help inventory these. The effort is one-time but requires coordination between development, QA, and operations. The complexity should not be underestimated – adequate time and resources must be allocated. The ITAM Review notes that migrating to a third-party Java is “not a simple process… but it may well be the most fiscally responsible option” in light of Oracle’s costs. Engaging stakeholders early (security, application owners, architecture teams) is critical so everyone understands the plan, timeline, and their role in testing and validation.
• Partial Adoption Risks: Some enterprises consider a hybrid approach (using Corretto for most apps but keeping Oracle Java for a subset that might require Oracle support). Be cautious: Oracle’s license does not allow you to only pay for some Java usage – it’s all employees or none. Thus, running even a single Oracle JDK in production technically obligates you to pay for the full subscription. You could face compliance issues or audits if you try to mix usage. Therefore, a phased migration should be carefully managed to avoid any Oracle JDK lingering without a license. Ideally, time the end of your Oracle subscription to coincide with full migration completion, or isolate any remaining Oracle-JDK-dependent systems and consider mitigating their compliance risk (for example, some companies isolated legacy apps and purchased a limited Oracle Java license under an older contract, though Oracle is closing those loopholes).
• Security and Patching Risk: A potential risk of leaving Oracle is missing out on immediate patches if Amazon (or whichever distribution you use) were to lag. In reality, AWS has been prompt with Corretto updates, and other OpenJDK vendors collaborate on security fixes. Still, enterprises should monitor Java security advisories. The good news is that all OpenJDK-based distributions share the same upstream code, so security issues are typically fixed across all distributions simultaneously (Oracle doesn’t have secret patches that others don’t; it contributes fixes to OpenJDK). There might be rare scenarios where Oracle fixes paying customers slightly ahead of the public OpenJDK release. For extremely sensitive environments, some companies mitigate this by having a small Oracle support contract for a lab system to get early access to patches, but this is not common. Generally, the risk of delayed patches on Corretto is low – AWS’s commitment to urgent security fixes suggests they will not fall behind.

In summary, the risks of moving to Corretto revolve around managing the migration project and ensuring support coverage, rather than technical incompatibility. Proper planning, testing, and perhaps third-party support can mitigate these risks. The significant cost savings and freedom from Oracle’s constraints are compelling reasons many enterprises judge migration as worth the effort.

Vendor Lock-In, Audits, and Contractual Pitfalls with Oracle

For CIOs and procurement leaders, a key concern with Oracle’s Java model is the potential for vendor lock-in and aggressive compliance enforcement. Here are critical points to be aware of:

• Enterprise-Wide Lock-In: Oracle’s “all employees” licensing is intentionally designed to lock in large organizations. Once you sign up, any growth in employee count can drive up costs, and there is no way to scale down usage to save money (short of terminating the subscription entirely). If your company acquires another company or expands headcount, Oracle expects those new employees to be added (usually at the next renewal, if not immediately). Conversely, if you downsize, Oracle may or may not allow a reduction in the licensed count before the end of the term. The contract likely fixes the count for the term, meaning you might pay for employees you no longer have until renewal.
• No Partial Coverage: The binary nature of the license (everyone or no one) also means you can’t choose to only license certain business units or environments. This removes flexibility and can force subsidiaries or divisions that don’t use Java to be counted, unless they are legally separate entities. All these factors increase dependency on Oracle’s terms.
• Audit Risk: Oracle is well-known for its software license audits, and Java is now a prime target. Oracle’s Java compliance team has ramped up audit activity, especially as customers attempt to avoid the new fees. Audit triggers can include: downloading Oracle JDK updates without an active subscription (Oracle can track who downloads patches from their portal), Oracle sales identifying customers who haven’t renewed Java subscriptions, or even simple database cross-checks (Oracle can look up company employee counts on LinkedIn or financial reports to see if an existing Java license is likely insufficient). Non-compliance – such as using Oracle Java in production without a subscription, or exceeding the bounds of a legacy license – can lead to steep penalties. Oracle has taken a zero-tolerance stance: even minor over-deployments have led them to refuse legacy renewals and instead demand a full employee-based subscription as remediation. They also often demand backdated fees for any unlicensed usage they discover (e.g., asking for 2-3 years’ worth of subscription fees for past use). This can result in six- or seven-figure compliance settlements if an audit finds unlicensed Java deployments.
• Renewal Traps: Oracle has effectively set “traps” in the renewal process for legacy Java customers. When approaching renewal, Oracle now requires customers to certify their current Java usage matches what they have licensed, essentially performing an audit as a condition of renewal. If any gap is found, Oracle may deny renewal on the old terms and force the customer onto the new model. Moreover, Oracle has indicated in FAQs and via sales reps that any renewal on old metrics is a “final” renewal – no further extensions will be offered beyond that, pushing customers eventually to the employee metric. In many cases, Oracle reps have refused to renew under legacy terms, citing policy changes. Using renewals to upsell the new, expensive model puts enterprises in a bind, especially if they have not prepared alternatives.
• Contract Clause Watch-Outs: Procurement should scrutinize any Oracle Java agreement for clauses like:
  • Audit and True-up Terms: Ensure you understand Oracle’s audit rights and your obligations to report changes in employee count. The contract may require you to true-up if your employee count increases during the term (or at least at renewal).
  • Price Protections: Oracle’s standard terms likely allow price increases at renewal. Negotiate caps or at least clarify future pricing tiers if possible.
  • Subsidiary/Affiliate Usage: Oracle often includes all affiliates in defining the licensee for Java subscriptions. This means even separate legal entities under your organization might need to be counted. If you have separate business units that you want to exclude, this needs to be explicitly addressed.
  • Termination and Continued Use: Understand what happens if you choose not to renew. Typically, the license to use Oracle Java ends when the subscription ends (for any versions released after January 2019). A clause may clarify that you have no right to use the software or receive updates past the subscription. This underscores the need to either renew or remove Oracle Java at that point.
  • “All employees” Definition: As shown earlier, Oracle’s definition is extremely broad. There may be ambiguities around contractors or part-timers – clarify any edge cases (for example, do overseas contractors count? Usually yes). Oracle even counts contractors of third-party service providers who support your operations, which can be very hard to measure. These definitions can lead to over-counting and disputes; some customers have found Oracle referencing public data that doesn’t match internal HR data.

Awareness of these pitfalls helps avoid surprise costs and formulate a negotiation or exit strategy. Next, we discuss using alternatives like Corretto in negotiations with Oracle.

Leveraging Corretto in Oracle Java Negotiations

Negotiation Strategy: The presence of a viable, no-cost alternative like Amazon Corretto significantly shifts the power balance in discussions with Oracle. Here are ways CIOs and procurement teams can position Corretto (or other OpenJDK distributions) to negotiate better terms:

• Demonstrate a Credible Alternative: Oracle sales will take a customer seriously only if they believe the customer is ready to walk away. It’s important to build credibility that your organization can migrate off Oracle Java. This may involve running a pilot or proof-of-concept using Corretto on some systems and documenting the success. If you can show that key applications have been tested on Corretto without issues, Oracle loses leverage. In negotiations, explicitly mention that the organization has validated Amazon Corretto (or a similar distribution) and plans to broadly deploy it if Oracle’s proposal isn’t acceptable. This signals to Oracle that their “all or nothing” stance could result in them getting nothing.
• Quantify the Cost Difference: Come to the table with numbers. For example, “We have 8,000 employees. Oracle’s $10.50 per user is about $1 million yearly, whereas using an open-source JDK would cost us close to $0. We could even pay for third-party support at, say, $100k and still save 90%.” By quantifying the potential savings, you clarify how much financial pressure the Oracle proposal creates. Oracle representatives are aware of these dynamics, and if they see you know them too, they may be more inclined to offer concessions (such as larger discounts or a more gradual ramp).
• Aim for Concessions: Some negotiation asks could include:
  • Discounted Pricing or Custom Tier: Pushing Oracle to significantly lower the per-employee price. For instance, large customers might negotiate well below the $5.25 rate for 40k+ employees if they threaten to leave. Oracle has an incentive to keep some revenue versus none.
  • Scope Limitations: Although Oracle’s standard is all employees, a very large enterprise might negotiate a creative structure (e.g., excluding certain independent subsidiaries or non-production machines). This is challenging – Oracle’s policy is firmly enterprise-wide – but if a customer’s environment is complex enough, there may be room to define a narrower license scope in a custom agreement. Oracle may instead push a global deal (Java bundled with other Oracle products at a broader discount), so be cautious not to entangle Java with other software unless it truly benefits you.
  • Longer No-Fee Periods: Pushing Oracle to guarantee public (free) updates for a longer period on the Java version you’re using. Oracle has extended some no-cost periods (Java 8 updates were free for personal use indefinitely, Java 17 got 3 years free under NFTC, etc.), possibly due to competitive pressure. While Oracle may not officially extend free support just for one customer, raising the issue underscores that you can get those updates elsewhere if Oracle doesn’t provide them under reasonable terms.
  • Contract Flexibility: Negotiate out any onerous audit assist clauses or at least get a commitment for a “true-up” approach rather than a punitive one. For example, try to include language that if you are out of compliance, you can purchase additional licenses at a pro-rata rate rather than being forced into a full enterprise metric immediately. Oracle may resist this, but it’s a point to raise.
• Parallel Evaluation of Third-Party Support: Engage vendors like Azul, IBM, Red Hat, or others for quotes on supporting your Java deployments. If Oracle knows you have a concrete offer from a third party to support OpenJDK for far less than Oracle’s price, it adds pressure. Some enterprises even bring in such vendors as part of an RFP process. The goal is to show Oracle that staying on Oracle Java is an active choice with an opportunity cost, not an inevitability.
• Timing and Execution: Ideally, start negotiating with Oracle well before your current Java agreement expires. This gives you time to genuinely prepare a migration if needed. If Oracle senses you are pressed for time (e.g., your renewal is next month and you haven’t begun migrating), their incentive to deal is lower. Conversely, if you’ve already migrated a chunk of systems or are ready to do so, you can afford to let the subscription expire and switch to Corretto, a strong fallback. Ensure that top management (CIO, CFO) is aligned with the plan. Oracle may attempt escalations or executive outreach to save the deal – having executive backing for the potential move to free Java takes away that pressure point.
• Use Data, Not Emotion: Keep the negotiation focused on factual comparison and business impact. Instead of expressing frustration with Oracle’s tactics (which might be justified but not fruitful in negotiation), focus on the value equation. For example, “We need to justify this internal spending. Given that open alternatives exist and are used by many in the industry, paying Oracle $$ per year has to come with commensurate value, or we will redirect those funds elsewhere.” This approach frames Oracle’s ask as a classic value-for-money decision, which is hard to argue against without acknowledging the elephant in the room (that their Java isn’t functionally unique).

In practice, many enterprises find that Oracle is unwilling to significantly budge on the core metric (all employees) but may offer steep discounts to keep the business. It then becomes a strategic decision: even at, say, 50% off, is Oracle Java worth it compared to free? For some organizations with very strict support requirements or extremely intertwined Oracle products, the answer might be yes for a portion of their estate. For many, the answer is no, and they proceed to migrate.

The key is that by positioning Corretto as a negotiation lever, you either achieve a much better deal or execute the migration plan and save money anyway. It’s a win-win for the customer (and a lose-lose for the vendor’s desired margins, which is fine from your perspective).

Recommendations

In conclusion, CIOs and procurement leaders should approach Oracle Java licensing with caution and an assertive strategy. Here are actionable recommendations to navigate this landscape:

• 1. Inventory and Assess Usage: Immediately conduct an internal audit of all Java installations and users. Determine where Oracle JDK is in use (which versions, which systems) and whether an existing license covers those uses. Many organizations are surprised to find outdated or embedded Java runtimes lurking in software. An accurate inventory is the foundation for compliance and for scoping a migration.
• 2. Eliminate Unnecessary Oracle Java Installations: Once you know where Java is used, remove or replace Oracle JDK when it isn’t needed. For example, if an application can run on OpenJDK (most can), deploy Corretto or another free JDK in a test environment, and validate it. Clean up environments where Oracle Java was installed but is not actively used – this reduces audit exposure. The case study mentioned earlier showed a company saved millions by eliminating unnecessary Java and negotiating effectively.
• 3. Evaluate OpenJDK Alternatives (Start with Corretto): Set up a proof-of-concept with Amazon Corretto on a representative subset of systems. Follow a structured testing approach:
  • Install Corretto alongside Oracle JDK on a test server.Run your application test suites thoroughly (integration tests, performance tests).Address any discrepancies (they will likely be minor; often none).
  This testing will build confidence that Corretto can fully replace Oracle JDK. Many organizations have found Corretto (or Eclipse Temurin, Azul Zulu, etc.) to be drop-in replacements with no code changes. Document these findings.
• 4. Engage Stakeholders Early: Discuss the plan with application owners, architects, and security teams. Ensure everyone understands why the change is being considered (e.g, “to save $X million over N years and avoid compliance risk”). Getting buy-in is important because these teams will help execute the migration. Also, brief your legal and vendor management teams on potential Oracle responses (like audit letters) so they are prepared.
• 5. Consider Phased Migration: Prioritize low-risk systems for the first phase of moving to Corretto:
  • Migrate dev/test environments and internal tools first. This yields quick license savings and uncovers any issues early.Pilot critical apps with a small subset of users or in parallel environments to double-verify stability.Plan the production rollout in waves, rather than a big bang. This controlled approach minimizes disruption.
  Maintain an updated list of which systems have migrated and still use Oracle, to track progress and ensure nothing is left behind inadvertently.
• 6. Line Up Support (If Needed): Decide how you will handle support for the Java runtime post-migration. Options include relying on in-house expertise and community support (viable if your team is experienced and the applications are not life-critical) or contracting a support vendor. If you choose a vendor, negotiate a support agreement that fits your needs (e.g., SLA for critical issues, how many cases, etc.). The cost will almost certainly be much lower than Oracle’s subscription, but you want to ensure responsiveness that satisfies your business requirements.
• 7. Use Migration Progress as Leverage in Oracle Talks: If you are in the middle of an Oracle Java renewal cycle, use any progress you’ve made as evidence in negotiations. Even stating that “we have migrated 30% of our workloads to AWS Corretto successfully” changes the tone of the discussion. Oracle then knows that at least a portion of their install base is gone, and you can move the rest. This may prompt Oracle to present a more reasonable proposal to retain some of your Java estate (if that is still on the table). Be willing to walk away if Oracle won’t meet your needs – maintaining the option to fully migrate is your strongest bargaining chip.
• 8. Be Wary of Long-Term Commitments: Approach any new Oracle Java contract cautiously. Avoid multi-year commitments unless heavily discounted and unless you have escape clauses. Given Oracle’s track record of changing terms, a shorter renewal (even annual) might be preferable, or none if you plan to exit. Do not let Oracle bundle Java “free” into a larger deal without understanding the implications – sometimes “free” can convert to a paid requirement later. Always read the fine print for any indirect obligations.
• 9. Monitor Updates and Stay Current (Security): If you switch to Corretto or another distribution, implement a process to monitor for Java security updates (e.g., subscribe to AWS Corretto announcements or OpenJDK mailing lists). Although updates are free, you are now responsible for applying them. Treat Java runtime updates with the same rigor as OS patches in your vulnerability management program.
• 10. Champion Independence and Cost Savings: Present the move to open-source Java as a positive, proactive strategy to leadership. Frame it for cost optimization, risk reduction (no audits), and technological independence. This will help garner executive support. Many CIOs are mandated to reduce software vendor spend and avoid lock-in. Java is now an opportunity to do both. Emphasize that you are not sacrificing quality or support, simply choosing a different source for the same technology, backed by a major cloud provider and community.

By following these steps, enterprises can take control of their Java strategy, rather than being forced into an expensive, one-size-fits-all contract. Oracle’s Java licensing changes have undoubtedly created challenges, but they have also spurred a reevaluation that often leads to more sustainable and customer-friendly solutions. Independent customer advocacy is key – don’t accept vendor terms at face value. WViable alternatives like Amazon Corretto, CIOs, and procurement teams have the tools to push back, optimize costs, and ensure they adopt what’s best for their organization’s long-term interest, not just acquiescing to vendor-driven agendas. Proceed carefully, document everything, and make decisions with an eye toward flexibility and fairness. The result can be significant savings and a Java environment free from surprise costs and compliance worries.