There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

The Google antitrust ruling could be an existential threat to the future of Firefox | Financials show 86% of Mozilla's revenue came from the agreement keeping Google as Firefox's default search engine

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.

DirkMcCallahan ,

Fuck.

erwan ,

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.

SamB ,

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.

fine_sandy_bottom ,

This article doesn’t even bother to explain the connection. I don’t get it if I’m honest.

WldFyre ,

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

fine_sandy_bottom ,

Obviously. Why is that threatened by this antitrust ruling ?

WldFyre ,

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 ,

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.”

zecg ,
@zecg@lemmy.world avatar

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 ,

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 😂🤡

Tja ,

Firefox enterprise edition, now with Lotus integration!

leanleft ,
@leanleft@lemmy.ml avatar
bighi ,

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.

zaphod ,

I’ll add:

  1. Buying some random companies
SirEDCaLot ,
  1. Change the UI and mess with plugins.
  2. More bloat in the install package that should be optional plugins.
Sabata11792 ,
  1. Offer advertisers user data.
SirEDCaLot ,

(for absurdly small amounts of money)

rob_t_firefly ,
@rob_t_firefly@lemmy.world avatar

Also forcing in AI somehow.

SirEDCaLot ,

Spend millions developing the AI with no real goal of what it will do or why it should exist… (Seems to be the current trend these days)

yuki2501 ,
@yuki2501@lemmy.world avatar

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

Nothing to be really scared about. Move along.

bloup ,

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

SturgiesYrFase ,
@SturgiesYrFase@lemmy.ml avatar

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 ,

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.

Etterra ,

Good. Open source that shit.

TheGrandNagus ,

I’m not sure what you mean, Firefox is already open source?

explodicle ,

Well then double open source it! No excuses!

LouNeko ,

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.

BrightCandle ,

That doesn’t produce any practical competition however. Some vertical splitting of the search business seems reasonable so we end up with multiple companies doing search out of it.

BradleyUffner ,

How exactly would you break up search? You can’t really do it geographically like the Bells.

Obi ,
@Obi@sopuli.xyz avatar

If if wasn’t American, I’d say nationalise it. Maybe at some point we’ll need some kind of international version of nationalising.

wanderingmagus ,

Have a UN agency run it?

jakob22 ,

In a perfect world

Omniraptor ,

played a neat game that’s basically a choose your own adventure where you play as president Bernie Sanders. It has this as a possible thing to do.

play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mollein…

nomadjoanne ,

Ah yes, cos that would lead to stellar leadership in Mozilla.

cupcakezealot ,
@cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

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.

800XL ,

don’t forget archive.org!

WhatAmLemmy ,

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.

rickyrigatoni ,

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 ,

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.

BelatedPeacock ,

Mozilla doesn’t use their donations for Firefox, though that might change if they lose the Google money.

todd_bonzalez ,
@todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee avatar

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)

OldWoodFrame ,

On the other hand, might also be good for Firefox to not be 86% funded by the maker of its top rival (Chrome).

Johnmannesca ,
@Johnmannesca@lemmy.world avatar

Right? Great knowing there wouldn’t be an adblock killswitch waiting for us all like the sword of damocles

Mwa ,
@Mwa@thelemmy.club avatar

ngl they can still get funding from donations but it only makes a little bit of their revenue

FerroMeow ,
@FerroMeow@lemmy.world avatar

I guess they read the room and this is why they started delving into the ad business

ulkesh ,
@ulkesh@lemmy.world avatar

So Mozilla will find other forms of funding. That’s how this works.

mlg ,
@mlg@lemmy.world avatar

Almost hoping this somehow causes browser support to fracture again.

It would be a pain for developers, but firefox and chrome using a gig of ram to view webpages and play videos is horrendous even with isolated design.

Also because I’m tired of google dictating the www by being a monopoly. It’s 2024 and jpegxl is being treated as ransomware as if enabling a god damn image format is too hard for web browsers. HTTP3/QUIC was 100% google’s invention that they just threw onto the web because no one else is developing this standard anymore. Manifest v3 is an explicit attempt to limit user control over web content. They even cornered the market along with Microsoft using gmail.

sparkle , (edited )

It would be a pain for developers, but firefox and chrome using a gig of ram to view webpages and play videos is horrendous even with isolated design.

That can’t be helped. Hard to explain well without knowing how much CS you’re familiar with, but basically in order to guarantee security/user safety you have to sandbox each tab (basically running an entirely separate container program for each tab which constantly checks for illegal memory access to prevent it from being exploited), all separately running their own interpreters for javascript/typescript, HTML, CSS, all of which are very resource intensive (mainly javascript/typescript). There’s not really any getting around this, no matter how well you design your browser.

Now, theoretically, with the growing popularity/advances in WebAssembly, and increase in usage of frameworks/graphics APIs like WebGPU, you could completely get rid of that sandboxing and completely get rid of the extremely slow javascript and html/css, in favor of completely using safe, compiled Rust programs. There’s active research using versions of WASM which only accept completely safe code (mainly safe Rust code) so using memory bugs generated from user error to access data in different tabs becomes impossible (aside from potential unaddressed bugs in Rust itself obviously) and you don’t need to sandbox each tab – the program practically sandboxes itself. Then you could potentially have browsers with thousands of tabs perform perfectly fine, assuming each of the websites is programmed competently.

But that’s not going to happen, because billions of users rely on HTML/CSS and JS, and it’s not pretty to transition away from. Getting rid of it would be like getting rid of pointy shoes, or getting rid of US Customary Units in the US, it’s just not happening no matter how much benefit it would bring to users. It’s not so much of a browser company issue as it is everyone ever would complain and potentially trillions of dollars of damage would be done. Also frontend web devs can barely punch out a “hello world” program in JS so there’s no way most of them are gonna be touching Rust or Haskell or something.

ipkpjersi ,

Also frontend web devs can barely punch out a “hello world” program in JS so there’s no way most of them are gonna be touching Rust or Haskell or something.

This is kind of true, but at the same time, I’ve also seen some pretty talented front-end devs fwiw.

ipkpjersi ,

If this hurts Firefox more than it hurts Chrome, that’s probably not a good thing for the health of the Internet. Google running the Internet unchecked would be bad for everyone.

Sorgan71 ,

good. Maybe firefox will die like it should have long ago

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines