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.

    • okwhateverdude@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Not all software needs to be backed by money. Money helps, of course, and I would support a non-profit financially that is focused purely on browser development. Right now, the only game in town doing that is Ladybird. But honestly, I think building upon a firefox fork makes more sense than starting from scratch.

    • tetris11@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Open source existed before money. Corporate backers came in because the product was successful, not because they thought it was a sinking ship.

        • tetris11@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          so the worldwide open source community can actually take over the project, in the full knowledge that their pull requests will actually be merged.

    • SailorMoss@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Perhaps it could be state funded? It worked for PBS for a time and it still mostly works for the BBC. Why not a browser? A truly independent steward for the open web is important and it doesn’t seem like Google is capable of that.

      • MeowZedong@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Seems like a good idea except for how often these states already force their own spyware and backdoors onto projects. Ideally, the state would fund it, but given their history, I’d prefer costs were covered by user donations as the interests of the users are the only interests I trust. We are the only group that is truly independent of competing interests.

        Crowd funding and donations obviously have their own drawbacks. Maybe we can find a work around to avoid the privacy violations of states in the future, but I don’t have a simple answer for how to accomplish this. The way the FOSS community operates is currently the best alternative I’ve seen, but I’m sure it’s not always lucrative for developers. People need to be compensated for their labor and our current systems tend to put development interests at odds with user interests.

      • Vincent@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’d absolutely be in favour of that, preferably funding from several states. But I’d prefer getting that in place before losing the main source of income.