Oracle Java continues to cause headaches. According to the ITAM/SAM Survey Report 2025, no less than 73 percent of the organizations surveyed have undergone an Oracle Java audit in the past three years.
The combination of frequent audits, complex licensing terms, and rapidly rising costs is prompting companies to look for alternatives. Many companies are switching to open-source solutions such as OpenJDK.
The cause lies primarily with Oracle’s erratic course. Over the past four years, the company has implemented four major changes to its licensing and pricing models. The most recent, introduced in early 2023, no longer bases license fees on actual usage, but on the total number of employees within an organization, including part-timers and external staff. This so-called employee-based pricing led to higher costs for many companies. And an increased need to closely monitor Java usage.
Licensing terms are complicated
In response, organizations are investing in tools and processes to gain control over their Java environments. These include automated tracking, internal audits, and improved collaboration between IT, legal, and procurement departments. Nevertheless, the majority report difficulty in correctly interpreting license terms, budgeting for Java costs, and tracking usage across multiple cloud environments. As a result, compliance becomes a daily task, and mistakes can lead to legal risks and heavy fines.
Against this backdrop, the exodus from the Oracle ecosystem is in full swing. According to the report, 79 percent of organizations have already switched to an alternative or are actively working on doing so. The motivation is not only cost savings, although two-thirds of respondents expect to save at least 40 percent, but above all reliability, scalability, and independence from a single supplier. According to the respondents, open-source variants of Java offer sufficient functionality and security, often with regular updates and support, but without Oracle’s restrictive conditions.
It is striking that, despite the challenges, many organizations continue to conduct their software audits largely in-house. Around 74 percent manage licensing and compliance in-house, despite limited resources and knowledge. This increases the risk of errors.