IcedTea is a OpenJDK fork, its major purpose was to replace those parts of the the JDK that Sun just couldn't open source (e.g. because they were based on licensed code that Sun couldn't make arrangements for).
It was Sun approved, and I see no reason Oracle would change that unless they want to fsck with OpenJDK in general. But, again, who knows? Oracle is the new Java steward and their polices, so far some good, some bad, are demonstrably different than Sun's were.
Sun licensed OpenJDK under the GPL. With that, it waived any right to sue its users for violation of any patent it held. Oracle bought that obligation with the rest of Sun and can't change the terms under which it is distributed - because anyone can redistribute it under the original terms.
"6. Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein."
and
"7. (...) For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program"
However the license isn't valid in a case like this unless it passes the TCK, right? And as we saw with Harmony, Sun and now Oracle is quite willing to withhold the TCK and therefore refuse a license.
How this plays out with OpenJDK and its derivatives I don't know; I'd assume they couldn't do anything for Java 6 (and I don't want to borrow trouble), but couldn't they e.g. in theory refuse access to the Java 7 TCK, resulting in a freezing of the GPLed version?
Anyway, my point here is that their GPL license of their technology is a much more restricted use of the license than we're used to.
However the license isn't valid in a case like this unless it passes the TCK, right?
No, that is not correct. The OpenJDK license is the GNU GPL plus a liberalizing exception for the Classpath. Possessors of the GPLed JDK are permitted to make and distribute modified versions without passing the TCK.
> However the license isn't valid in a case like this unless it passes the TCK, right?
No. Since it's licensed under GPL, it's completely Oracle-proof. The license is valid regardless TCK compliance.
> How this plays out with OpenJDK and its derivatives I don't know
Any derivative is also covered by the same license.
> refuse access to the Java 7 TCK, resulting in a freezing of the GPLed version?
OpenJDK can gain any features present in JDK 7. As long as it's derived, Oracle can do nothing about it. What may get you in trouble is calling it Java without passing the TCK. I am happy with changing JDK and JVM to "Just-Like-Their Development Kit" and "Just-Like-Their VM".
It will be funny if, in the end, it's Stallman who makes Oracle into a civilized corporate citizen.
It was Sun approved, and I see no reason Oracle would change that unless they want to fsck with OpenJDK in general. But, again, who knows? Oracle is the new Java steward and their polices, so far some good, some bad, are demonstrably different than Sun's were.