Mozilla might launch Firefox Premium in 2019
Mozilla CEO Chris Beard confirmed in an interview that the organization plans to offer premium services in the near future.
Mozilla is aware of the organization's dependency on search and the revenue that it brings in. About 90% of the overall revenue of Mozilla comes from search deals at the time of writing, the remaining ten percent from Pocket, donations, and other revenue sources.
Firefox Premium is an attempt to diversify Mozilla's revenue without limiting or restricting any of the existing services.
Beard mentions a VPN service as an example of a premium service. Mozilla could offer a free basic VPN service to all of its users and a paid version with improved functionality and features on top of that.
The practice is not uncommon; several VPN providers offer a free basic version with limited bandwidth, server availability or speed, and an upgraded paid product that does away with the limits or extends them. It is unclear if the VPN service would be run by Mozilla or if the organization would cooperate with an existing provider.
Mozilla did cooperate with ProtonVPN in the past already to offer VPN services to Firefox users.
The only other service that Beard mentions in the interview is a data storage service but no information was provided in the interview. Companies that offer data storage services often use a freemium model as well. Users may sign up and get a couple of Gigabytes of storage as free users; those that require more may pay a monthly or yearly fee to get more online storage.
Beard mentioned that Mozilla is considering several premium service options and that Mozilla is aiming for an official release in October 2019.
Mozilla plans to launch individual services in the future. The interview suggests that the organization could launch these services for free initially and premium options later on.
Tip: Check out the best VPN add-ons for Firefox.
Dave Camp, Senior Vice President of Firefox, provided the following comment in an email:
"We were founded on the belief that the internet should be open and accessible to all. A high-performing, free and private-by-default Firefox browser will continue to be central to our core service offerings. We also recognize that there are consumers who want access to premium offerings, and we can serve those users too without compromising the development and reach of the existing products and services that Firefox users know and love."
Closing Words
Firefox Premium services could launch as early as October of 2019. The services could diversify Mozilla's revenue streams significantly. It is clear that Mozilla wants to reduce the reliance on search deals especially since the revenue depends to a large part on one of its competitors in the browser market, Google.
A Google not-renewing the search deal scenario looms over Mozilla's head even though it is unlikely that this is going to happen. Google could negotiate with an iron fist perfectly knowing that Mozilla does not have lots of choices when it comes to search deals partners.
The only viable candidate left would be Microsoft and the company's Bing search engine. Microsoft did make search deals in the past with companies like Yahoo or more recently Verizon.
If Mozilla gets the premium services right, it could very well establish services that surpass search revenue in the long run. The organization needs to stay true to the attributes it stands for, especially when it comes to privacy, openness, and a user-focused appraoch to things.
I don't mind the release of premium services by Mozilla provided that core Firefox remains untouched (which it will) and that these services are reasonably priced and have a strong focus on privacy.
Now You: What is your take on Firefox Premium?
And since nobody mentioned, I think IM the only one in the world with this: I refuse to back and pay to people that hate me. TRherefor no money for rainbow freak show, who hates me every minute of my life. And since Im working white male, my salary is comparable to the income of 1000 of them (I mean around $2k/month)
Nope, no money from me!
There was supposed to be a second paragraph to that previous post. Sorry.
Until this undelying problem is fixed, everything from our operating systems to our web browsers and search engines will continue their current artificial shrinkage in this race to convert the internet into the same morass of artificial middlemen and subscriptions as cable TV.
Here’s praying our federal government stops pretending the internet is something other than a two-way communications network. Restoration of our stripped Title II rights and protections is the foundation for all future protection of internet traffic. It’s why it was specifically targeted by last century’s media, entertainment and especially news establishments. With the change in leadership of our House in the last election, and the Senate’s reversal of Pai’s abomination, our president is the sole remaining barrier to full reversal of this decision. It was by a very large margin the largest destruction of established rights and protections in U.S. history.
Mozilla give money and they really dosnt ask their products users where they give the money, they give that non profit money to very proliberal movements and individuals. that isnt ok and we need to remember that!
Software and code arent political currency but mozilla does just that. What Software and code is, free for all and for all views. But if they want to support only one thing in political spectrum, then their message is that their products or code isnt for everybody.
Perhaps they can create a new premium e-mail service. Since Lavabit bit the dust in 2013, I’ve been using a premium e-mail provider in Europe but every six months when my bill is due, both of my credit cards keep rejecting it (it tries one, and then the other), and I need to call and verify the charge while temporarily losing access to my e-mail account. It is quite annoying. I’m tempted to switch to an American e-mail provider because of it.
or change your credit card provider.
Hello Everyone!
As Mozilla’s Firefox is my preferred browser of choice the only VPN (paid) that I can see it collaborating with is with Mullvad (from Sweden). As far as I can tell, it is the only VPN website that does not track you and it has an uncommon encryption system for robust security.
In addition, even though it IS based in Wonderful Sweden they do take pains in releasing any information to authorities as per the FAQ on the website at: https://mullvad.net/en/faq/
Do you obey the EU Data Retention Directive?
The directive does not apply to Mullvad because we are not considered an electronics communications service. This is also the case for Sweden’s Lagen om elektronisk kommunikation (LEK). Swedish legislation.
i
Do you know that their army intercepts every data signal what goes in or thru their country :) and if company inside of Sweden says that they use “uncommon encryption” REALLY? :)
@intelligencia: “it has an uncommon encryption system”
I couldn’t find more information on this, but the phrase “uncommon encryption system” raises a big red flag for me. Rolling your own crypto is rarely a good idea. Has their encryption system been independently certified?
I don’t understand this discussion. Wait what’s going to happen in Oct. and then, maybe, complain. Right now it’s only wind-bagging.
My paid VPN service (ExpressVPN) notes a partnership with Mozilla, apparently only for Firefox Lite at this point, as far as I can tell….. Should I be relieved or concerned?
This seems like a reasonable thing for Mozilla to do.
GIB OOS MOANEEEEEEEE!!!
Yes, Mozilla Corp. would need some more diversity of income to afford their diversity of workforce.
Mozilla is greedy, I’m not going to pay monthly subscription fee. With things are all ready being tight, as it is, economy not as stable. Circa 2012 we had a decent firefox browser. I suspect that the era of free browsers are over.
I made a switch to Palemoon, Vivaldi, Brave and Opera. Palemoon is by far a decent browser, when searching for bitchute and youtube videos. I’m in agreement that VPN within a browser is a bit risky. A decent standalone VPN will cover your tracks from prying eyes and peeping toms online.
I am waiting for Windows 10 Premium. Yes forced bloated updates themselves costing money for bandwidth and storage and Microsoft taking your money again for them.
Telemetry, Telemetry, Telemetry
I can’t understand telemetry guys, do you think about campatibility checking for this much various platforms is easy?
Telemetry should exist so software developers find out what the hell is going with the bug their users are anoyyed with :|
No, telemetry and analytics is a tool for devs to see what features users uses least of all others. So they can remove features, features what perhaps you like to use on your daily routines.
They not trying to find bugs with analytics data, for that they have normal bug reporting tools.
So please and dont use analytics at all.
Step 1. Give me control over what my money will be spent on, like https://www.humblebundle.com/ does.
Step 2. Have me as a guaranteed premium subscriber, up to $40 a yer. I live in Poland (renting a cave costs 60%, food – another 25% of an aerospace engineer’s salary) so it’s a lot.
Back in the days when Mozilla cared about its users (as far as we could tell)–days of XUL, XPCOM, Gecko, and a no-restrictions AMO, I would have gladly provided $20/yr (maybe more) for a bunch of great products that did everything I wanted the way I wanted it.
That Mozilla doesn’t exist anymore.
@Allen:
I actually think that Mozilla does care about Firefox users — just a different set of users now than before.
“I actually think that Mozilla does care about Firefox users — just a different set of users now than before.”
Yes, the users that don’t understand tech enough to complain about ads and tracking, they’re a more interesting target for them. And Mozilla is selling this as “We care about the majority, not the vocal minority”. Don’t fall for it.
@Anonymous: “Yes, the users that don’t understand tech enough”
Precisely. That is the largest demographic, and the one Mozilla has decided is the most important for them.
“Don’t fall for it.”
Don’t fall for what? Mozilla’s actions and statements appear to be in alignment here. I don’t think they’re being tricky.
It really sucks that Firefox is no longer addressing the group of people that includes me, but it’s a business decision that I can understand and one that Mozilla hasn’t been deceptive about.
It just means that the new Firefox isn’t a browser that I use anymore, since I can no longer customize it enough make it acceptable for me.
“Don’t fall for what? Mozilla’s actions and statements appear to be in alignment here. I don’t think they’re being tricky.”
I don’t think that you understood my point. Don’t fall for them pretending that they will sacrifice the interests of the power users like you to better satisfy the interests of the non tech savvy majority, which could be a possibly reasonable defense that they use a lot already. Because they are not interested in serving better the interests of the non tech savvy majority either, the non tech savvy majority is just easier to exploit because it doesn’t understand to what extent ads and tracking are an attack on their rights.
I don’t see how screwing the privacy of people who don’t understand why privacy is important is better than what Google is doing.
> I don’t mind the release of premium services by Mozilla provided that core Firefox remains untouched (which it will)
If they decide to release such premium browser then at first basic version certainly will be left untouched but it’s kinda naive to think that in time they won’t change it to become more obtrusive, limited on features if this premium variant will be successful. After all, this is Mozilla Corporation we’re talking about – not the same one that dethroned Internet Explorer years ago; it’s not the community driven Mozilla anymore but one that is more interested in shady investments in Burda Media and “experiments” done on users, protecting their programmers feelings (the case of Brotli algorithm compression short form you wrote on October 11th 2015) than what the userbase needs and most of all, wants. The people behind Mozilla want easy money to split among themselves while pompously showing their “we care for your privacy” marketing image.
Firefox nowadays is just awful like Chrome in terms of privacy – the fact they started blocking 3rd-party cookies by default won’t change or will soften, justify the presence of telemetry within the browser that works for the company. Not mention again, the experiments done via addons system on users who didn’t agree on such. Don’t fall for this people.
I can see where this is heading…Mozilla creating and offering Subscription Fenix (Android) and/or Firefox that has several choices for built in VPN, tools-plugins for eye-candy javascript appearance and beefed up privacy and security. Only a sawbuck per month, but for just one browser profile (no multiple profiles) and just one device or system (iOS/Android/Windows/Mac) Doubt if that would fly with major or minor Linux distro developers who test browsers compatibility with each major version update/bugfix for their repositories. Unlimited installs for multiple profiles/devices/OSes would be $25.00 per month.
Uses only iPhone, Macintosh and Safari
No way would I use a free or paid Firefox supplied and sponsored VPN with some, most, or all of its servers based in the US…in fact I am checking out setting up a end-to-end encrypted IPv6 mesh network called Hyperboria-Cjdns from GitHub through the FSF, problem is that I will need at least one other tech-savvy “friend” to set up the same on his or her Windows or Linux OS box, and I don’t know anyone personally who is or could.
From what I have read, using “free” VPNs is unreliable and pointless, and any that you connect though a browser is going to have access to your configuration and connection(s) before activation.
And I am still using only Win7 OSes, which obviously will be EoL early next year and I don’t have and never used any version of Win8.1 or Win10, and haven’t decided if I will buy a new, newer,refurbished or used laptop or tower with either preinstalled. Creating and compling the free software is a bit mor involved, but that is likely what I will wind up doing, rather than opt for the privacy and telemetry swiss cheese Win 10.
I’d still like to see a privacy version of FF, one with about:config set for privacy, Features folder deleted and an anti-tracker that’s far more effective than the built in one. In my ESR, there are about 350 about:config changes. Considering the fewer entries compared to regular FF, no containers, etc., still a lot of fiddling. A paid version that doesn’t reset or reinstall defaults on updates.
Interesting the above price for Proton VPN, which I use, is higher than the standalone version. Browser based VPN’s are a bad idea; VPN’s belong upstream, system wide; charging more for a browser add on doesn’t make much sense. Mozilla’s Premium pricing has to be attractive.
Unless Google is forced to quit drenching the public in Chrome, creating opportunities for non-Chromium browsers, Mozilla might be better off branching out into some different area. Nothing says they have to focus solely on browsers.
That’s a good thing, provided that Mozilla decides to change course, and listen to its users.
As opposed to forcing down their throats whatever is their politically-correct version of the type of tech we ought to use, because, hey, it’s free, so don’t complain if we boss you around.
That wold take a cultural revolution on their behalf, and I haven’t seen any signs to that effect.
Premium = A paid, monthly subscription version of Firefox that allows ad-blocking and other extensions once they add manifest v3.
I am curious what Firefox Premium will be. It’s my primary browser. I think I’d have to subscribe to it to support the browser. I don’t want to live in a world where it’s just Chrome as a mainstream browser. A lot of people I know are waking up to Firefox as a viable alternative.
I still find it hard to believe what has happened to software in the past ten years. Seems there aren’t any young developers coming up dedicating free time to making open source software. And that creating new software or modifying a platform like Windows is getting increasingly difficult or limited. We’re heading towards corporate-dominated software like never before.
@Mike: “I still find it hard to believe what has happened to software in the past ten years.”
Yes, it’s a bit sad, but not that surprising. It’s the natural result of the commercialization of OSS.
“Seems there aren’t any young developers coming up dedicating free time to making open source software.”
There are tons of them, actually, but the majority aren’t working on the sorts of software that is of commercial interest to the major software houses. The big boys tend not to leave much room for the small guys.
I completely agree with your last paragraph.
I’d pay premium dollars if they’d let me use an old version of Firefox.
It’s called Waterfox. Firefox 56 base + all more recent security patches, up to and including the current Firefox 67 security fixes.
https://www.waterfox.net/
I would call that a parasite, taking but not giving back something. Or do they contribute to Mozilla/Firefox?
As opposed to Firefox, which has taken code contributions from thousands of independents, never given them a cent, and pays its CEO $10M a year?
“I would call that a parasite, taking but not giving back something.”
I remember when the Adblock Edge fork was made to remove “acceptable ads” from Adblock Plus, before the ublock origin times. The Adblock Plus people had the same type of reaction, calling the fork removing their anti-user features “the dark side of open source” “parasiting” on their work. But no, that’s exactly why free software exists, to allow the users to be free from the malicious behavior of a developer by using a fork. Waterfox is giving back to the users what Mozilla tried to take from them. Now I would be very happy if Firefox took from Waterfox the code that allows classic add-ons to work and the parts that remove telemetry, but I don’t think that Mozilla is interested in those contributions.
@Gerard:
What are you doubting that Waterfox does? As near as I can tell, they adhere to the terms of the Firefox OSS license.
mozilla is too ambitious for what it is, maybe its time for them to downsize. There are dozens of vpn and cloud services out there, would anyone trust mozilla with their privacy after the back alley’s they’ve traveled? If they want to stand out they should go back to their roots and return to the browser people admired.
If Mozilla had a non-pushy pay-what-you-want link alongside the Firefox download link I’d consider paying a nominal amount of say a few bucks. So long as I’m paying Mozilla directly, and not via some creepy silicon valley tech giant weirdos like PayPal or worse.
What they need to do:
1) fill the startpage/new tab page with ads for services like Protonmail, ProtonVPN, simply everything their users are interested in. They shouldn’t be afraid of calling something ads, don’t listen to the vocal minority on reddit or twitter. Filling the new tap page with ads is the only way to actually make decent amounts of money, it is that simple.
Including VPN ads when someone browses in a public W-Lan is idiotic. The last thing I need when I travel and use a public Wifi is a surprise-ad. I bet they don’t make much money with this.
Honestly, I can’t understand what is so difficult to understand here for Mozilla. They literally have a window to 300 million users where they can show everything they want. And instead of showing decent ads they spent 15 million for showing 3 links to recent news! And the idea behind it was to show a sponsored message here and there. This is not how you make money.
Opera has managed to get around 30% of their income from non-search deals with the simple strategy of having relevant ads in the new tab page.
2) second, create a firefox premium version with it’s own products, for a monthly fee of a couple of dollars. Telemetry free, without ads, VPN, trash-email service in the browser, privacy friendly search engine, etc.
Simply everything they would do if their money comes directly from their users.
It may even be a viable strategy to literally fill the free browser with sensible ads, to make people switch to the premium version. If that’s how the company can be saved, then why not?
With the current anti-tech atmosphere in the media, how long until the business model of google breaks down?
The writing is on the wall:
> Cost per click on Google properties — which roughly measures the amount Alphabet charges advertisers for each ad served on its web sites — dropped 29 percent from last year and 9 percent from last quarter, which might be alarming investors concerned that Google’s pricing power for ads is eroding.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/04/alphabet-earnings-q4-2018.html
Maybe google for now can offset these changes with putting even more ads everywhere. The google search nowadays is pretty much all ads. But even Google is slowly switching to Cloud business, etc.
The biggest problem for google is that the ads created some kind of “spending fatigue” in people. When you get bombared with these ads, at one point you no longer react to them.
In 5 years everyone will see that tracking ads were a temporary thing, and they will disappear over ethics and moral questions, not over privacy concerns.
Every company that wants to differentiate itself needs to act now!
Why not to create models were as all of this is public property and as such is also financed that way. With taxes right out of the states pockets… after all, we are all democratic in one way or another…
the internet and the tools to conquer it shall be like tab water in public ownership… i am sure these are simple concepts everyone will easily understand. This is the only way private for profit schemes get a viable competitor and a real choice for all… the same can be done with journalism, public media, public health care… we are all easily capable of all of this…
…the Swiss government has along history of cooperating with the US government and the swiss based VPN provider Proton VPN would certainly find no way to operate without the US government being able to see inside… maybe not actively but on request, so as usual, all others are out but the US government and some of its subsidiaries are in for sure.
Addendum:
I actually tend to think in regards to firefox there will be no solution.
They say it is to get away from Google, part that’s only part of the story. They are simply losing users, around 100,000 per day.
They now want to add all kinds of additional stuff in order to make money. For a browser this is a death sentence. A browser can not be more than a browser, and ad tiles are the only practical way of making money next to search engine deals.
Opera is the only other major browser that has to survive without having a tech giant behind them. They do everything they can to make money with Opera. And it has boiled down to ads in the start page and licensing. There’s nothing more you can do.
Opera is surviving on three kind of deals: [1]
– search (ca 60%)
– ads in start page
– licensing deals on mobile phones
Licensing is off limits to mozilla because they have lost the mobile market.
So all its left is ads on start page. Its that simple. There’s also a lesson to learn for Mozilla from the time Opera abandoned Presto: [2]
> “Because of our switch to the Blink engine, our retention rate on desktop users is much better now. This is because most websites work in Opera since we’re using the same engine as Google. We think we’ve become more relevant after we moved over to the Blink platform, and more companies now start to work with us,” Boilesen said.
> “We’ve got twice as many developers on the desktop browser now than we had with Presto, because all [our] resources went into maintaining Presto. The only error we made with Presto was that we kept it too long. Our change to Blink was because we wanted to get on the offensive with regards to innovation, we used too many resources to keep Presto competitive.
There are only two ways. You either stay innovative and keep up with the times, or you downsize and develop for a small niche group. Mozilla is doing neither.
[1] https://techcrunch.com/2018/07/02/browser-maker-opera-has-filed-to-go-public/
[2] https://www.zdnet.com/article/show-me-the-money-how-opera-started-thinking-about-the-bottom-line-and-what-that-did-to-its-software/
@Benjamin: Some people wanted to start an independent browser foundation, but it takes a lot of effort to do it, and you don’t get much in return.
They’re not interested in the solution, only in ‘proving’ their own ideas right. Users have been screaming at them for 10 years and they’ve ignored them every time. They say “We’re listening, tell us what you want” and then ignore everything we say.
With a half Billion dollar budget, they could easily have produced their own android variant (i.e. like a non-crap version of CyanogenMod) if their coders were half competent. They aren’t. The company is full of morons, with the most moronic ones making all the decisions.
They will literally hire people based on political ideology over someone with actual programming skills. With a hardcore Feminazi and ‘male feminist’ in charge, there is no way to change course.
Offering freemium services could be the more user respecting revenue source Mozilla has been missing for so long, instead of serving ads and attacking privacy by promoting Google search and Pocket.
Unless this just happens to be more ads for third party services, like ProtonVPN now. Knowing Mozilla, there’s also the risk that this becomes too aggressively integrated and promoted in the browser. I wouldn’t want to see a VPN enabled by default like they will do for the Cloudflare DNS, or a deliberately confusing user interface pushing me to upload my files to their online storage like they did with their screenshots upload tool. Those are extreme examples, but they could also simply pollute the interface with promotional buttons and popups, or make unwanted background connections to those services… Finally, would the services themselves respect the user ? Would the online storage be client-side encrypted, would the VPN offer enough guaranties of non snooping ?
the problem about freemium is that this work model limits what the user can do… just look at all freemium programs… or either they only allow you to do a certain amount of tasks/runs/etc or they don’t let you use all the features till you buy a subscription.
instead of freemium, I would say having a free and a paid version…
let’s say, the advantage of the paid version could be no ads at all, no tracking, no selling information, no nothing, meaning, the paid version could be a version with a very and up to date powerful adblocker, script blocker, etc, that ensures that you are always the most private you can ever be, like a super hyper mega private window.
For when 500 million in Google Money just isn’t enough for a non-profit organization.
I think the issue is not the 500 million that Mozilla gets currently, but that it is always at the mercy of Google or another tech megacorp. I think that it is a wise decision to diversify the income stream to become completely independent. Whether Mozilla would drop Search money altogether and go all-in on ad-blocking and privacy is another matter. Right now, I cannot see that happening.
@Martin Brinkmann
Brave’s business model seems to work. Mozilla would have needed to be smart and active instead of dumb and lazy, though.
> Brave’s business model seems to work.
Exploiting browsing data to target ads is already done in Firefox, with Pocket, even if it’s only a secondary revenue source compared to their selling search queries to Google to target ads. Either way it’s about converting the users most sensitive data into ad money.
@Anonymous: “Exploiting browsing data to target ads is already done in Firefox, with Pocket”
I think this statement is a bit hyperbolic and misleading. The “recommended by pocket” thing does pay attention to your browser history (it compares the site names you’ve been to with a list of articles that may be relevant to them), but it only does that locally in the browser (browsing data is not being sent to anyone else, even Mozilla, for this) and is opt-in. If you don’t sign up for Pocket, none of this happens. Also, you can disable Pocket entirely if you wish.
@New Tobin Paradigm: i.e. better to opt for Pale Moon?
Yeah, it’s better, [Editor: removed, please be polite].Because something tells me their purpose is to code a browser, not to screw us over with ambigous we are for privacy and users, but take money from the enemy. Also little voice whispers they could do it much better than vaunted lond-dead Mozilla for a minute fraction of the money, if we support them. Or a new team/organization like them, which currently does not exist in the real universe because Mozilla assholes suck all the oxygen and initiative out of this space while being a bloodsucking deadweight.
Supported this in the past with more than a cup of coffee as they’re asking. The worse investment ever made toward a free public project. The two bozzos over there, the paradigm head promoted sheriff recently, LOL!, and the ever changing wolf face founder, they’re patting each other back and hammering users on their forum. By the amount of time they’re spending on these activities, it can be easily seen that PaleMoon will soon became LameMoon, with a bunch of retired users daily finding another website no longer working with PM. The project is on its last straw as Mozilla mothership it further distancing its code and PM is left with just couple old obsolete code toys for its sandbox.
[Tip: Check out the best VPN add-ons for Firefox.]
The article behind the quote is from 2014. There are some more VPN-Add-Ons available by now. For example, I’m using Windscribe.
@Thorky: something fishy going on with that site. They say a free account gives you 10 GB/month, and signing up without giving your email address gives you 2 GB. But …. if you opt for signing up without an email address all usernames you propose are taken – yeah, sure. Clearly meant to force you to give an email address, which, considering the company is located in Canada (Five Eyes country) makes sense.
can’t confirm this.
If you really want Windscribe, get one of the lifetime licenses still available. They pop up periodically, last time was Jan. I’ve been using Windscribe for two years or so and it’s OK, nothing special, sometimes works well, other times, slow. Typical VPN variability.
Easy interface, just avoid the ad blockers, etc., and use the system version, not the browser add on; definitely not both as they recommend.
The question is not to diversify Mozilla’s revenue streams but if 300 million dollars per year is really necessary to build a half baked web browser.
Browser development costs peanuts compared to diversity and inclusivity programs that mozzila runs.
@john Exactly. I just want the good old days when Mozilla concentrated on Firefox. Stop all these other services, and whatever else they think they can market. Just make the best browser possible, and leave it at that.
when these crazies take a lead positions, that is what the others get.
Crime syndictates like Google and Microsoft are getting away with what they’re doing because the average person has no idea how much of their data and personal info is being stolen by these government-protected monopolies. Other countries have their own equivalents like Vkontakte and Baidu so they have no interest in stopping the corporate espionage. Most of the VPNs can’t even be trusted, especially in any Five Eyes country. Since most governments and their profiteering corporate monopolies are unwilling to stop the espionage it’s up to individuals create and support alternatives. It seems unlikely now but that’s because most people still don’t realize any of this is happening. I’m already seeing people starting to leave Chrome and Google services now that the truth is starting to emerge. Mozilla could either gain from this or some other browser will quickly overtake both Chrome (google doesn’t have much choice about spyware blocking since espionage is its core business) and Firefox.
Mozilla is no longer a non-profit organization. Check out the “Make Tech Easier” website’s “How Do Internet Browsers Make Money?” article.
TECHNICALLY it is non-profit, you know after the CEO’s $10M paycheck is dedcuted from their profits and they siphon off countless more millions to their BoD and political “charities”.
@John C: “Mozilla is no longer a non-profit organization.”
This is simply false. Talking about the Mozilla Foundation (which is a nonprofit organization and is legally distinct from the Mozilla entity that makes Firefox), it continues to be a non-profit organization. The article you’re referring to (https://www.maketecheasier.com/how-internet-browsers-make-money/) is simply reporting that the Mozilla foundation made a profit.
However, being a “nonprofit” is an IRS designation, and that has not been removed. Also, nonprofits are allowed to make a profit. The nonprofit status simply means that’s not the purpose of the organization. Whether or not any profits are taxable is the underlying issue, and the answer to that is “maybe, depending on how the profit was made and what it’s being used for”.
See a discussion on this topic here: https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/taxes-nonprofit-corporation-earnings-30284.html
“Nonprofit corporations, by definition, exist not to make money but to fulfill one of the purposes recognized by federal law: charitable, educational, scientific, or literary. Under state and federal tax laws, however, as long as a nonprofit corporation is organized and operated for a recognized nonprofit purpose and has secured the proper tax exemptions, it can take in more money than it spends to conduct its activities.
In other words, your nonprofit can make a profit. Whether or not a nonprofit’s income is taxable depends on whether the activities are related to the nonprofit’s purpose.”
“@John C: “Mozilla is no longer a non-profit organization.â€
This is simply false.”
Mozilla has never been a real non-profit, actually. What makes the browser is the Mozilla corporation, a taxable for-profit. The profit is then given to the non taxable non-profit Mozilla foundation. This is NOT the same as being just a non-profit, as they are dishonestly describing themselves. The distinction is not purely academic. It explains a lot of the shameful greedy shenanigans Mozilla has done to its users. It has just become more visible during the last years.
Mozilla Managers: “But, but… What about our salaries? What about that luxury estate we own in California?”