5 ms·

For Mozilla as a company, as a business, is there a benefit of pouring resources into own web engine?

cptskippy 5y ago
That's the wrong way to think about it. Mozilla isn't a for profit business, they are a non-profit with a mission. The right question is, does pouring resources into their own web page align with their mission statement? https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/mission/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/mission/
- sp332 5y ago
  This is incorrect. The Mozilla Foundation (the non-profit) owns the Mozilla Corporation, which is for-profit and does Firefox development. The Corporation is the one that gets money from Google, and sends millions of dollars per year to the Foundation.
  - cptskippy 5y ago
    Is it though? https://blog.mozilla.org/press/2005/08/mozilla-foundation-forms-new-organization-to-further-the-creation-of-free-open-source-internet-software-including-the-award-winning-mozilla-firefox-browser/ https://blog.mozilla.org/press/2005/08/mozilla-foundation-fo... > The Mozilla Corporation is a taxable subsidiary that serves the non-profit, public benefit goals of its parent, the Mozilla Foundation, and the vast Mozilla community. The Mozilla Corporation is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Foundation. The constructs are for regulatory and financial hand waving.
    - sp332 5y ago
      Well, Mitchell Baker gets millions of dollars a year while the browser market share continues to decline. So there's some profit motive involved.
      - cptskippy 5y ago
        So no it becomes a grievance about CEO compensation for poor performance?
  - dblohm7 5y ago
    Technically you are correct in that the corporate entity that is Mozilla Corporation is registered as a for-profit company. However, since its sole shareholder is a non-profit Foundation, it is able to invest differently than a typical corporation. For example, there is no pressure from the Foundation to "maximize shareholder value."

That's the wrong way to think about it. Mozilla isn't a for profit business, they are a non-profit with a mission. The right question is, does pouring resources into their own web page align with their mission statement? https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/mission/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/mission/

sp332 5y ago
This is incorrect. The Mozilla Foundation (the non-profit) owns the Mozilla Corporation, which is for-profit and does Firefox development. The Corporation is the one that gets money from Google, and sends millions of dollars per year to the Foundation.
- cptskippy 5y ago
  Is it though? https://blog.mozilla.org/press/2005/08/mozilla-foundation-forms-new-organization-to-further-the-creation-of-free-open-source-internet-software-including-the-award-winning-mozilla-firefox-browser/ https://blog.mozilla.org/press/2005/08/mozilla-foundation-fo... > The Mozilla Corporation is a taxable subsidiary that serves the non-profit, public benefit goals of its parent, the Mozilla Foundation, and the vast Mozilla community. The Mozilla Corporation is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Foundation. The constructs are for regulatory and financial hand waving.
  - sp332 5y ago
    Well, Mitchell Baker gets millions of dollars a year while the browser market share continues to decline. So there's some profit motive involved.
    - cptskippy 5y ago
      So no it becomes a grievance about CEO compensation for poor performance?
- dblohm7 5y ago
  Technically you are correct in that the corporate entity that is Mozilla Corporation is registered as a for-profit company. However, since its sole shareholder is a non-profit Foundation, it is able to invest differently than a typical corporation. For example, there is no pressure from the Foundation to "maximize shareholder value."