I'm not proposing any solutions. Just stating that a software with source open may not necessarily mean it's free and open in the sense it was originally intend

I'm not proposing any solutions. Just stating that a software with source open may not necessarily mean it's free and open in the sense it was originally intended. What one wants to do with it I think depends on one's own values. I use qutebrowser, vivaldi and brave (on mobile) and sometimes console based browsers when I can get away with it. Qutebrowser and Lynx are open source. Vivaldi and I think Brave aren't open source? I'm using them because I read about their team, their business model, their past and hung out in their forums and decided that I'd support them. Doesn't mean anyone else have to. And there's nothing wrong with making money off opensource software and that's how it was intended in the first place. Original open source software authors didn't mean that the software has to be free of charge. For me, I don't want to support an organisation that sacks the researchers of their core product but the execs pay themselves millions of dollars. Most of those dollars come from Google. I'm sorry that that makes no logical sense to you.