The Justice Department’s proposal to force Google to rein in and even sell off its Chrome browser business may seem like a win for competitors such as Mozilla’s Firefox browser. But the company says the plan risks hurting smaller browsers.

In their recommendations, federal prosecutors urged the court to ban Google from offering “something of value” to third-party companies to make Google the default search engine over their software or devices.

The problem is that Mozilla earns most of its revenue from royalty deals—nearly 86% in 2022—making Google the default Firefox browser search engine.

"If implemented, the prohibition on search agreements with all browsers regardless of size and business model will negatively impact independent browsers like Firefox and have knock-on effects for an open and accessible internet,” Mozilla says. “As written, the remedies will harm independent browsers without material benefit to search competition.”

  • Lvxferre
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2251 month ago

    May I be frank? I suspect that, in the long run, Mozilla not getting this money will actually benefit Firefox. Sure, so exec will get pissed as they won’t get 5.6 million dollars a year, and Firefox won’t get some weird nobody-asked-for feature that’ll be ditched some time later; but I think that they’ll focus better on the browser this way. Specially because whoever is paying the dinner is the one picking the dish, and with a higher proportion of their effective income coming from donations, what users want will stop being so neglected.

    Just my two cents.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      701 month ago

      Firefox won’t get some weird nobody-asked-for feature that’ll be ditched some time later

      Nah, the features nobody asked for will just be limited to ones that will provide a revenue stream.

      • Lvxferre
        link
        fedilink
        English
        151 month ago

        However once they lose the googlebux, a meaningful part of the revenue stream will be donations. And features implemented because of donators asking for them are, typically, things that we users desire.

        • pelya
          link
          English
          111 month ago

          Donations are not sustainable. Many open-source projects tried them, and the only thing they can cover are server costs or conferences, developers are still working for free on their own time.

    • Andy
      link
      fedilink
      English
      681 month ago

      I totally agree.

      Frankly, Mozilla should be embarrassed to have released this statement.

      It’s basically ‘Please don’t harm our competitor for corruptly bribing rivals! We like those bribes very much!’

    • Lung
      link
      English
      261 month ago

      Yeah but in the short term the company will literally go out of business

        • Lung
          link
          English
          151 month ago

          Y’know, you’re right & that’s wild. I guess I should have known, but didn’t assume that they have like 600m in unrelated investments. Though the burn rate is quite a lot too, so they probably would scale back browser dev a lot if it lost its profitability & become a pure VC kinda org

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        91 month ago

        I care about Firefox and Thunderbird, not Mozilla. The software is open source and will persist.

        • tb_
          link
          English
          221 month ago

          The way Mozilla can advocate for web standards will be sorely missed.

          • Pika
            link
            fedilink
            English
            5
            edit-2
            26 days ago

            To my knowledge they don’t though, Chrome has had the overall market share for years. Most of the time the mozilla project is tailing behind Chrome, because anything that they add to Chrome if the other browsers didn’t follow suit they were left in the dust. I haven’t seen the Mozilla project as a Trailblazer in years

      • Lvxferre
        link
        fedilink
        English
        51 month ago

        Perhaps.

        Worst hypothesis the company gets completely bankrupt, but someone takes up the torch.

        • Lung
          link
          English
          191 month ago

          The thing is it’s never been more expensive and time consuming to write a browser, it’s bigger scope than a kernel in many ways. Stuff like Epiphany isn’t even close, despite relying on Apple’s webkit. Most distros just push people to Firefox now, despite a history of KHTML and all that. We would need something like the Linux Foundation to pick it up (which runs on corporate sponsorship for a shared resource)

          • 2xsaiko
            link
            fedilink
            English
            61 month ago

            If Google is the only thing holding up the non-Apple web browsers, maybe then this will lead to scaling down the insane scope of the web standards so it becomes reasonable to implement and maintain a browser for non-megacorps.

            Wishful thinking, but hey.

          • @theherk
            link
            English
            41 month ago

            Bigger scope than a kernel? That’s a bold statement.

            • Not sure it’s that bold even. Chrome has approx. 10% more lines of code than Linux, and even for Linux 60% is just drivers.

              Flawed metric, sure, but it at least shows that they’re probably similar in complexity.

            • Lung
              link
              English
              171 month ago

              Not only does it need to do everything from memory management to job scheduling, it also has all of the UI and graphics driver complexity blended in. Usually that’s a different layer that the kernel historically didn’t worry about, it would be as if GTK is part of Linux, along with the programming language. Then there’s shit like WebAssembly and WebGL, databases, sandboxing, permissions, user management… A Brower is like a cross platform OS built to run on another OS

              • @theherk
                link
                English
                -1
                edit-2
                1 month ago

                The comment that was here was a bit rude, and I don’t like that. Well others didn’t either, but that just reminds me that being kind is possible while disagreeing. So I abridge to this.

                I’m surprised by this take and personally feel the algorithmic density of the kernel and scope of work with hardware abstractions make it much more complex than a browser with access to system calls. But maybe that is just a crazy old man that isn’t thinking straight.

    • @irreticent
      link
      English
      251 month ago

      WTF‽

      “The head of Mozilla earned roughly $5.6 Million during 2021.”

      • @valkyre09
        link
        English
        7
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Excuse me, where do I fill out the form to have the first $30,696 of my salary processed as non taxable benefit? Please and thank you

  • astro_ray
    link
    fedilink
    English
    139
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    what Mozilla is really afraid of is losing the over inflated bonus the execs get paid.

    • @prof_wafflez
      link
      English
      601 month ago

      Mozilla needs to ditch their CEO and maybe even their board. They’ve lost their way all because the leadership is greedy

      • @HailSeitan
        link
        English
        71 month ago

        That’s mistaking a structural problem for a personal one. Zeynep Tufekci has a great argument about why that wouldn’t work:

        It’s reasonable, for example, for a corporation to ponder who would be the best CEO or COO, but it’s not reasonable for us to expect that we could take any one of those actors and replace them with another person and get dramatically different results without changing the structures, incentives and forces that shape how they and their companies act in this world.

  • @TheTimeKnife
    link
    English
    691 month ago

    That’s unfortunate, but it still needs to happen. Mozilla will adapt.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      01 month ago

      They haven’t launched a successful product in a decade. Pretty sure they’ll get more desperate and have even more misses. Probably AI.

      • @TheGrandNagus
        link
        English
        51 month ago

        Eh. Given how dead Thunderbird was, I feel it’s fair enough to call it’s recent massive renewal a launch.

        And fkr what it’s worth, their recent ‘AI’ endeavours have been private offline language translation (i.e. no sending data to Google translation servers), and better screen reader functionality for blind people. Both good features.

  • Dariusmiles2123
    link
    fedilink
    English
    621 month ago

    I understand why Mozilla would want to keep the money coming from Google, but it might also be good for them to be less dependent from Google.

    Nothing is preventing them from cutting deals with other search engines if they want to keep doing that.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      63
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I feel like Mozilla is a big money laundering scheme at this point. It only exist so chrome isn’t a monopoly, and I pretty sure the CEO and several other workers are getting paid an obscene amount to do nothing all day while only 20% of the money actually goes toward working on the browser.

      • z3rOR0ne
        link
        fedilink
        English
        51 month ago

        Just out of curiosity, where does the 20% estimate come from?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          9
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          It’s half exaggerated and half true.

          Last year, there was some breakdown of Mozilla earnings circulating on the web and I vaguely remember them gaining like 600 or 800 millions (mostly from Google) while only spending something around 200 millions for software dev, and this was in 2022 (their revenue from Google increases each year for some reason). That’s 33% to 25%, so it’s either 66% or 75% of Mozilla revenue used for god knows what.

          • z3rOR0ne
            link
            fedilink
            English
            101 month ago

            Thank you for that breakdown. I’m a big fan of Firefox, but have been aware of there being issues with Mozilla for some time now (albeit from the periphery). I figured when these cases came against Google, that even though I generally supported the breakup of the monopoly, I knew that a story like this one would eventually land.

            If Mozilla is indeed burning money instead of putting the majority of it towards Firefox and, to a lesser extent, Thunderbird, then yeah, they’re going to need to reassess their budget and where to allocate their assets as without big moneybags Google forking over the funds, it’d be within their best interests to really invest hard into making their browser better.

            Thanks again.

  • @ocassionallyaduck
    link
    English
    591 month ago

    “Listen, making the entire market dependent on one corporate benefactor just sothey aren’t a 100% monopoly and only a 99% one is important”

    Jesus Christ Mozilla, do you hear yourself?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      211 month ago

      Remember, Mozilla spends more on executives and their “outreach” programs than they spend on Firefox developers.

    • Onno (VK6FLAB)
      link
      fedilink
      English
      231 month ago

      I’m guessing that once Google is prohibited from providing incentives, the bottom will fall out of that particular market and those other search engines will likely pay less, if anything, for the privilege.

      • Billygoat
        link
        fedilink
        English
        41 month ago

        Would other search engines be able to “pay to be default”? My understanding is if this went through then browsers wouldn’t be able to take money from any search engine to be the default.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          101 month ago

          As I understand google is only prohibited from doing so because they are a monopoly and this would be abuse of their position, so smaller engines should be unaffected. For example, if I recall correctly, bing pays Vivaldi to be the default.

          • Billygoat
            link
            fedilink
            English
            41 month ago

            Thanks! So then the judgement is two fold. First to split chrome from google. Second to restrict google from paying to be the default search engine on any browser.

    • NegativeNull
      link
      English
      21 month ago

      Mozilla should partner with Kagi and bundle the browser with that search engine and share revenue

  • jaxiiruff
    link
    fedilink
    English
    181 month ago

    Oh my fucking god Servo cannot get here soon enough.

  • m-p{3}
    link
    fedilink
    English
    18
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    It’s certainly better than the status quo. Sure, Mozilla will hurt at first because they’ve put their revenue source in the same basket, but it’s an opportunity to grow back.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      You’ve just given a great summary of the history of breaking monopolies, really. History says you are correct. For example, AT&T is still kicking.

      • SaltySalamander
        link
        fedilink
        41 month ago

        The AT&T of today is not the same one from pre-breakup. That AT&T is decidedly not still kicking.

          • @GamingChairModel
            link
            English
            21 month ago

            Well, Bell Labs isn’t the magical place that it used to be, and that was originally an R&D shop basically enabled by the economics of the AT&T monopoly.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    71 month ago

    Mozilla will be fine. I’ll literally pay them annually if worst comes to worst and I bet others would too.

  • @stupidcasey
    link
    English
    61 month ago

    Maybe force them to give it to Mozilla since they are the primary ones that are hurting from googlopoly?

      • Dekkia
        link
        fedilink
        English
        151 month ago

        I guess they could start saving money by not paying their CEO millions/year.

      • @theherk
        link
        English
        51 month ago

        I guess google would pay for search on chrome too, which is extra funny.

      • @stupidcasey
        link
        English
        2
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        With a user base as big as chrome you would have to look for ways to lose money.

  • @Potatofish
    link
    English
    01 month ago

    The comments are a who’s who of anarchists. Watch them burn it all down and end up with Microsoft owning the dominant browser again. Idiots…

        • Makhno
          link
          English
          31 month ago

          Lmao so you’re a self-professed idiot.

          Nothing to see here, folks. Just a dumb child smelling their own farts 😂