5 ms·

> Firefox is owned by Google You're gonna have to explain why you think this, because publicly, Firefox is owned by Mozilla which is not owned by Google in any

> Firefox is owned by Google You're gonna have to explain why you think this, because publicly, Firefox is owned by Mozilla which is not owned by Google in any way. But maybe you know something the rest of us don't?

Zambyte 3y ago
> Firefox is owned by Mozilla which is not owned by Google in any way. Who owns Mozilla? Put another way, if Google stops funding Mozilla, will it still exist? The only reason Firefox exists is because Google wants something they can point to in court and say "look! we're not a monopoly!"
- eis 3y ago
  The shareholders of Mozilla own Mozilla. And that's not Google. If Google stopped the search deal then Bing would take over in a second.
  - rvnx 3y ago
    At a much lower price, because search deals are paid based on number of searches done (so indirectly, the number of active users), and because Google has 90%-ish market share, it means a 90% drop in revenue. Also, Bing has on average twice higher RPMs, so, a 50% of drop in income after rev-share. So, you remove 90% of the revenue, and you divide by 2 what is remaining.
    - calgoo 3y ago
      Technically it might even be healthy for Mozilla to loose 90% of the budget as they are spending that on bs projects that has nothing to do with Firefox. Maybe it would force them to spend the money on the Firefox team, and all the money hungry top management would go somewhere else where they can waste money.
      - asadotzler 3y ago
        Mozilla spends a very large majority of its revenue directly on Firefox. Cut Mozilla's budget by 90% and you cut Firefox's budget by nearly 90%.
  - notpushkin 3y ago
    A little nitpick: Mozilla has no shareholders. Mozilla Foundation is a non-profit, while Mozilla Corporation is 100% owned by the Foundation. Your point still stands though.
- capableweb 3y ago
  Mozilla is two parts, the Mozilla Foundation and a subsidiary which is Mozilla Corporation. Neither of those are "funded" by Google. I'm guessing you're referring to the search partnership between the two? That doesn't mean that Google owns Mozilla, unless you're really unclear about what "partnership" or "deal" means. Mozilla have multiple deals with search engines, not just Google.
  - Zambyte 3y ago
    Okay. Call it what you want. Do you really think Firefox will hesitate to implement this, when considering the "partnership" they have with Google?
    - capableweb 3y ago
      > Mozilla opposes this proposal because it contradicts our principles and vision for the Web. https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/852 https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/852 I guess they would.
  - xg15 3y ago
    What other deals with search engines are there and do they bring the same amount of income for Mozilla? The internal organisation of Mozilla doesn't really seem relevant here.
- hpaavola 3y ago
  Yes, Mozilla would exist if their deal with Google would end.
- laurentlb 3y ago
  > if Google stops funding Mozilla, will it still exist? If Google stops funding Mozilla, would they manage to get another deal, e.g. with Bing? If so, the power of Google would be limited.
  - Zambyte 3y ago
    Why do you think Microsoft wouldn't just let Mozilla fold and Firefox fail?
    - laurentlb 3y ago
      I have no idea. I just pointed out that the control of Google depends on whether Firefox could find alternative founding or not.
- indymike 3y ago
  > The only reason Firefox exists is because Google wants something they can point to in court and say "look! we're not a monopoly!" A competitor that survives at the charity of a monopoly is evidence of a monopoly, not evidence of the opposite. A court might see a non-profit that is directly dependent on Google for ongoing operating cash very differently that how it saw Gates' one-time personal investment in Apple.
billyhoffman 3y ago
Because Google pays Mozilla ~$500M dollars a year, nearly 80% of all of Mozilla's revenue, use Google as the default search provider. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2023-05-05/why-google-keeps-paying-mozilla-s-firefox-even-as-chrome-dominates https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2023-05-05/why-go... If Google turned off this money faucet, Mozilla would be severely impacted. Unfortunately as Firefox's market penetration gets lower, the value of that deal gets lower, should Google stop paying it and someone like Bing takes over.
- Terretta 3y ago
  Meanwhile, Google pays Apple $15B+: https://9to5mac.com/2021/08/25/analysts-google-to-pay-apple-15-billion-to-remain-default-safari-search-engine-in-2021/ https://9to5mac.com/2021/08/25/analysts-google-to-pay-apple-... They have no motivation to "turn off the money faucet" since the payment is effectively lead generation -- bringing eyeballs to their ads that pay them more.
xg15 3y ago
My guess is, GP is referring to the significant amount of funding that Mozilla gets from Google. Not sure if it's still the case, but I believe at least for a time, it was actually their main source of funding and basically what kept the whole organisation alive. So by "don't bite the hand that feeds you" logic, they couldn't be interested in being too adverse with Google, because in the end, this could threaten their whole existence. Not sure if this is still the case though, or if they managed to diversify.
friend_and_foe 3y ago
Are you going to continue to pretend that you don't know what he means?

Zambyte 3y ago

> Firefox is owned by Mozilla which is not owned by Google in any way. Who owns Mozilla? Put another way, if Google stops funding Mozilla, will it still exist? The only reason Firefox exists is because Google wants something they can point to in court and say "look! we're not a monopoly!"

eis 3y ago
The shareholders of Mozilla own Mozilla. And that's not Google. If Google stopped the search deal then Bing would take over in a second.
- rvnx 3y ago
  At a much lower price, because search deals are paid based on number of searches done (so indirectly, the number of active users), and because Google has 90%-ish market share, it means a 90% drop in revenue. Also, Bing has on average twice higher RPMs, so, a 50% of drop in income after rev-share. So, you remove 90% of the revenue, and you divide by 2 what is remaining.
  - calgoo 3y ago
    Technically it might even be healthy for Mozilla to loose 90% of the budget as they are spending that on bs projects that has nothing to do with Firefox. Maybe it would force them to spend the money on the Firefox team, and all the money hungry top management would go somewhere else where they can waste money.
    - asadotzler 3y ago
      Mozilla spends a very large majority of its revenue directly on Firefox. Cut Mozilla's budget by 90% and you cut Firefox's budget by nearly 90%.
- notpushkin 3y ago
  A little nitpick: Mozilla has no shareholders. Mozilla Foundation is a non-profit, while Mozilla Corporation is 100% owned by the Foundation. Your point still stands though.
capableweb 3y ago
Mozilla is two parts, the Mozilla Foundation and a subsidiary which is Mozilla Corporation. Neither of those are "funded" by Google. I'm guessing you're referring to the search partnership between the two? That doesn't mean that Google owns Mozilla, unless you're really unclear about what "partnership" or "deal" means. Mozilla have multiple deals with search engines, not just Google.
- Zambyte 3y ago
  Okay. Call it what you want. Do you really think Firefox will hesitate to implement this, when considering the "partnership" they have with Google?
  - capableweb 3y ago
    > Mozilla opposes this proposal because it contradicts our principles and vision for the Web. https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/852 https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/852 I guess they would.
- xg15 3y ago
  What other deals with search engines are there and do they bring the same amount of income for Mozilla? The internal organisation of Mozilla doesn't really seem relevant here.
hpaavola 3y ago
Yes, Mozilla would exist if their deal with Google would end.
laurentlb 3y ago
> if Google stops funding Mozilla, will it still exist? If Google stops funding Mozilla, would they manage to get another deal, e.g. with Bing? If so, the power of Google would be limited.
- Zambyte 3y ago
  Why do you think Microsoft wouldn't just let Mozilla fold and Firefox fail?
  - laurentlb 3y ago
    I have no idea. I just pointed out that the control of Google depends on whether Firefox could find alternative founding or not.
indymike 3y ago
> The only reason Firefox exists is because Google wants something they can point to in court and say "look! we're not a monopoly!" A competitor that survives at the charity of a monopoly is evidence of a monopoly, not evidence of the opposite. A court might see a non-profit that is directly dependent on Google for ongoing operating cash very differently that how it saw Gates' one-time personal investment in Apple.

billyhoffman 3y ago

Because Google pays Mozilla ~$500M dollars a year, nearly 80% of all of Mozilla's revenue, use Google as the default search provider. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2023-05-05/why-google-keeps-paying-mozilla-s-firefox-even-as-chrome-dominates https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2023-05-05/why-go... If Google turned off this money faucet, Mozilla would be severely impacted. Unfortunately as Firefox's market penetration gets lower, the value of that deal gets lower, should Google stop paying it and someone like Bing takes over.

Terretta 3y ago
Meanwhile, Google pays Apple $15B+: https://9to5mac.com/2021/08/25/analysts-google-to-pay-apple-15-billion-to-remain-default-safari-search-engine-in-2021/ https://9to5mac.com/2021/08/25/analysts-google-to-pay-apple-... They have no motivation to "turn off the money faucet" since the payment is effectively lead generation -- bringing eyeballs to their ads that pay them more.

xg15 3y ago

My guess is, GP is referring to the significant amount of funding that Mozilla gets from Google. Not sure if it's still the case, but I believe at least for a time, it was actually their main source of funding and basically what kept the whole organisation alive. So by "don't bite the hand that feeds you" logic, they couldn't be interested in being too adverse with Google, because in the end, this could threaten their whole existence. Not sure if this is still the case though, or if they managed to diversify.

friend_and_foe 3y ago

Are you going to continue to pretend that you don't know what he means?