Mozilla has a close relationship with Google, as most of Firefox’s revenue comes from the agreement keeping Google as the browser’s default search engine. However, the search giant is now officially a monopoly, and a future court decision could have an unprecedented impact on Mozilla’s ability to keep things “business as usual.”

United States District Judge Amit Mehta found Google guilty of building a monopolistic position in web search. The Mountain View corporation spent billions of dollars becoming the leading search provider for computing platforms and web browsers on PC and mobile devices.

Most of the $21 billion spent went to Apple in exchange for setting Google as the default search engine on iPhone, iPad, and Mac systems. The judge will now need to decide on a penalty for the company’s actions, including the potential of forcing Google to stop payments to its search “partners completely,” which could have dire consequences for smaller companies like Mozilla.

Its most recent financials show Mozilla gets $510 million out of its $593 million in total revenue from its Google partnership. This precarious financial position is a side effect of its deal with Alphabet, which made Google the search engine default for newer Firefox installations.

The open-source web browser has experienced a steady market share decline over the past few years. Meanwhile, Mozilla management was paid millions to develop a new “vision” of a theoretical future with AI chatbots. Mozilla Corporation, the wholly owned subsidiary of Mozilla Foundation managing Firefox development, could find itself in a severe struggle for revenue if Google’s money suddenly dried up.

    • foofy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      Firefox can do without Google being the default fine. What they can’t do without is all the money that Google pays them to make Google be the default.

    • Ech@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      The problem isn’t the search engine - it’s the money.

    • vanderbilt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      I am livid over her absolutely disgraceful management over Moz. When electron was building a de facto monopoly of Chromium on the desktop she made no moves to produces equivalent tooling. While Node grew into a behemoth she totally ignored it. The only thing that has come out of Moz in the last decade that mattered was Rust, and she’s already fired the Rust team. She is poison and serves only to suck up a salary that could fund development.

      Mozilla needs its wake up call and to start being the underdog that makes something worth doing. With Manifest V3 and the anti-trust case on the horizon they have a fork in the road that will define what becomes of them. Hopefully she can make one good decision and it’ll be the right one.

      • ☂️-@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        thats ceos for ya.

        i doubt they will escape from going through some bad times.

  • Affidavit@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    I wonder how much of their income actually goes towards development. At a glance, it seems a great deal of unnecessary administrative bloat has been added to Mozilla.

    I honestly don’t see why a browser company needs to be so large (>700 employees).

    Not that I want people to lose their jobs, it just seems unnecessary.

    • Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      There’s a reason why every other browser maker has given up and adopted Chromium. It’s not easy to support a browser and rendering engine across half a dozen OSes while keeping it secure, performant and stable.

    • stoly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      They do more. They are also a vpn, and they are standing up new services.

    • barsoap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      Mozilla is not a browser producer, it’s a general internet charity that earns money by producing a browser. Most of their income goes to charity and reserves of which they have about 1bn – roughly four times as much as wikipedia just for a sense of scale, wikipedia doesn’t do any business deals to get at cash but instead does annoying donation drives.

      They could scale down significantly while still keeping firefox development ongoing, they probably wouldn’t have much issue finding enough donations to fund development, but the strategy seems to be building reserves and diversify commercial income, things like the revenue share they get from pocket for sending people to ad-ridden pages.

      When you’re currently donating to Mozilla you’re not donating towards Firefox: Mozilla-the-company can’t receive funds from Mozilla-the-foundation, those donations are going to charity work.


      And, to make this clear: None of this is a grand revelation, or new, or outrageous, it’s basically always been like that and it’s always been a perfectly proper way to run a charity. Most of the recent pushbacks comes from people hating that Mozilla funds stuff like getting women into STEM, being outraged that the wider Mozilla community is not keen on having a CEO which opposes gay marriage (very staunchly so), etc.

      • mke@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Oh my, could you share more information about the homophobic CEO thing?

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Search for Brendan Eich, nowadays he’s running the Brave browser.

          • mke@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 months ago

            Oh, him. Thanks.

            nowadays he’s running the Brave browser.

            Yeah, that’s what I knew him from. Figures he would go on to lead a browser infamous for its controversies.

    • SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      Well, a browser is a massive piece of software, especially if you include the development of a render engine as Firefox does

      Web standards evolve constantly, you need to keep up somehow, together with optimizations, bug fixing, patching of security vulnerabilities, etc

      • mke@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        And a JS engine! Firefox uses Mozilla’s SpiderMonkey, unlike every other (Blink/chrome-family) browser which uses Google’s V8.

      • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Indeed. People severely underestimate how complex and costly developing a browser and web renderer is.

        In many ways it’s far more complex than OS development.

        Firefox cannot get by on user donations alone. Mozilla needs a way to generate revenue, but nobody wants Mozilla to commercialise in any way. They’re stuck between a rock and a hard place.

  • ocassionallyaduck@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    Chrome is the existential threat to FireFox.

    Chrome is… Also Google.

    Break up Google, make chrome competitive, and then we’ll stop seeing advertisers own the web standards and implement things like AVIF and ManifestV3, and instead embrace open solutions that favor users.

    The JPEG XL vs AVIF thing still makes me mad.

  • Cyber Yuki@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    It’s a threat to the Mozilla CORPORATION, not the Mozilla Foundation nor the browser.

    Nothing to be really scared about. Move along.

    • A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      The corporation is owned by the foundation, and does most of the browser development. If you want the browser development to continue, it is a concern.

      • Cyber Yuki@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Not necessarily. Corporate money has a hidden contract. Mainly, you will develop what we tell you to develop and you will stall what we tell you to stall.

        Google money is ad money. It’s DRM money, it’s private silo money, not general development money.

        If you believe corporations drive all good development in the world, look at how many projects have been bought and killed by Microsoft.

        In fact, why would Firefox accept money from one of its competitors? That’s SUPER fucked up.

        Just think about the anti features that Google mmay want Firefox to implement: Unlockable ads, third party cookies, user tracking, and so on.

        Is tha the development we want?

        I say, let’s open fundraisers and keep Firefox free of corporate influence.

    • bloup@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      why do you think the Mozilla corporation losing 86% of their revenue wouldn’t hurt the Firefox browser?

      • SturgiesYrFase@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Well, only way I can figure it wouldn’t effect the foundation, is that the corporation is a wholly owned subsidiary of the foundation, presumably this is to protect the foundation financially and legally from anything that might happen to the corporation.

      • Tja@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        There was a well sourced video a few months ago that showed where the money is going. Long story short, not into development, for the most part.

  • bighi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Mozilla gotta do something.

    And based on their actions on recent years, that something is probably going to be: 1) firing more developers, and 2) increasing the compensation of their CEO.

  • zecg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    I use only Firefox / Fennec, but fuck Mozilla. The obscene amounts they paid their CEO for stupid decisions, their shitty Pocket acquisition, regressions such as saving page as pdf simply disappearing on mobile. Let that rotten corporation die, the code is open source, someone will do a Gecko browser.

    • Supermariofan67@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      I don’t think it’s quite as simple as someone just forking it. Realistically, a browser is an extremely complex piece of software that requires a lot of organizational effort to maintain, deal with security issues, etc. Pretty much every other piece of software on a similar scale I can think of (the kernel, KDE, Blender, Libreoffice) has some sort of organization behind it with at least some amount of officially paid work. All the major forks of Firefox or chromium follow quite closely to upstream for this reason (which is also why I’m skeptical of Brave’s ability to maintain manifest v2 long term, despite their probably genuine best efforts to do so).

      I do wish that Firefox were developed and funded by an organization specifically dedicated to developing it. This could of course happen if Mozilla dies. But that’s going to require someone starting it, which is not at all a small or cheap task.

      I could also see a future where Oracle or IBM buys it 😂🤡

  • erwan@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    Good, Baker can go find an other x millions salary elsewhere because it’s necessary for her family (as she said in an interview), and Firefox can become a community project again that still pays salary to actual developers but without the expensive bullshitting C-suite.

  • katy ✨@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    if you only do a monthly donation of $5 a month that’s still $60 a year and i urge you do do it. i have a recurring donation for firefox, thunderbird, and wikipedia because i believe they’re essential to the internet.

    • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      i have a recurring donation for firefox, thunderbird, and wikipedia

      So to Mozilla and the Wikimedia Foundation?

      (weird that you list Firefox and Thunderbird as separate donations)

    • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      I will not donate anything to Firefox until Mozilla guarantees my money will be spent on Firefox.

      But yeah wikipedia, archive.org, etc. Give them your money.

      • Ricky Rigatoni@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        mozilla donations not going to firefox was probably the caveat to secure google’s funding. If google has to pull their bribes, mozilla might make donations go to firefox.

        Or I could be completely wrong. We won’t know until we know.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 months ago

          Yeah, I’ll donate to Mozilla the moment they actually apply my donations to Firefox. I’m not going to pay for them to buy ad companies, donate to other charities, or put on charity events. I honestly just want to fund Firefox development.

          That said, I’m okay with not 100% of it going to Firefox, as long as the bulk of it does. I understand there’s a lot of admin overhead they need to cover and whatnot, and I’m fine with my money going to that. But it seems most donations don’t make it to Firefox dev.

  • LouNeko@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    I would stand behind the idea of splitting Google in it’s seperate branches with no shared assets. Basically Google search becomes is seperate corporation, Google AI, Google Webservices, Google Ad Services, YouTube. etc… This will hopefully undo some of the webs enshitification since now the essentially most powerful company on the web has to actually offer good product for profit instead of compensating bad product with more profitable one.

    • kakito69@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      You’d need a hundred million people sign up for that $5 subscription to make up for Google’s bribe.

      • deleteme@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Your math is off. It would take 8.5 million people donating $5 a month, to equal the 510 million a year from Google.

        My math (please correct me if I am wrong):

        $510 million / 1 year

        $ X / 1 month?

        $510 million / 12 months = $42.5 million / 1 month

        $42.5 million / $5 per person a month = 8.5 million people a month

        • uranibaba@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Is it not

          5 x 12 = 60

          $510 000 000 / $60 = 850 000

          $60 is one year of subscription for if user.

          850 000 users need to pay 60 dollar per year to amount to $510 000 000.

          (Or 510 000 000/5 = 10 200 000 users per month to reach the same amount monthly.)

        • merc@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 months ago

          Also, Mozilla says that it spends only $220M on software development expenses, so if 100% of the money went to that it would only require 3.7 million people paying $5 per month.

          But, IMO, if the Google money spigot is turned off, it might be that other companies that rely on web browsers (Apple, Amazon, Netflix, Microsoft, etc.) will want to spend at least a few tens of millions on Firefox. That would mean that end-users wouldn’t need to support the entire cost of developing it.

          Right now, everyone except Apple uses Blink which is a Google project tied to Chrome. Since Google has been found to have been illegally abusing their monopoly, the status of Chromium / Blink has to be uncertain. It would be smart insurance for these companies to ensure that Firefox doesn’t go away in case something happens to Blink.

  • SamB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    It’s strange how the Internet has been flooded by this news. Like leave Google alone or Firefox gets it. Very strategic use of the media might I say.

      • WldFyre@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Its most recent financials show Mozilla gets $510 million out of its $593 million in total revenue from its Google partnership.

          • WldFyre@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 months ago

            United States District Judge Amit Mehta found Google guilty of building a monopolistic position in web search. The Mountain View corporation spent billions of dollars becoming the leading search provider for computing platforms and web browsers on PC and mobile devices

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      Wtf, no? It’s saying “Hey, it’s great that you’re angry about Google search being a monopoly, but you need to be aware and ready that this ruling could further cement their browser monopoly.”