The Mozilla Foundation

gemal writes "We're very pleased to announce the creation of the Mozilla Foundation, a non-profit organization that will serve as the new home for mozilla.org. The Mozilla Foundation will continue mozilla.org's work of coordinating the development of the Mozilla codebase. With an independent non-profit as the legal home for Mozilla, we will also promote the distribution and adoption of Mozilla applications and technologies. In addition, we will raise funds to ensure Mozilla's long-term survival." Update: 07/15 21:47 GMT by T : Yablo writes "MozillaZine is running a blurb about how since earlier today, when the Mozilla Foundation was created, AOL has laid off all the Gecko developers. Ex-mozilla.org has a list of the casualties."

Comments

So, no more AOL/Netscape support?

[JoeBuck]

Does this mean that Netscape (rather, AOL-Time-Warner) is withdrawing its support? Will they still be providing facilities, network connectivity, etc. or will the Mozilla Foundation have to raise all that on its own? Will Netscape be providing any money to the Mozilla Foundation?

Re:So, no more AOL/Netscape support?

[iceT]

Think of it this way:

1) Mozilla development and advocacy becomes a non-profit organization.

2) AOL/Time Warner contributes all the same money that they used to contribute.

3) AOL/Time Warner now gets to write off the contribution because it's to a non-profit organization.

Wow

[Plutor]

This is nothing but a Good Thing(TM). Congrats to the Mozilla team on their (apparent) independance. In other news, check out the redesigned web page.

Isn't it ironic that the top cells don't render the way they meant in Mozilla 1.4? They shouldn't be using tables for layout!

looks like Moz is getting serious

[The Evil Couch]

The Mozilla Foundation will also promote the distribution and adoption of our flagship applications based on that code. AOL, IBM, Sun Microsystems, Red Hat, and other companies will continue to support Mozilla through the Foundation.

I guess Mozilla's ready to actively try to knock IE down.

Re:looks like Moz is getting serious

[autechre]

I guess the question is: If you replaced their shortcut to IE with a shortcut to Mozilla that used the IE icon, would they notice? There are themes for Mozilla which are designed to make it look identical to IE. OK, so they would wonder where all the popops went, but other than that, could someone such as this tell the difference?

(Yes, I know that there are a small percentage of sites out there that are brain-dead and REQUIRE IE, but if my parents never come across them, I'm betting many other people don't either. If you believe Jakob Nielson, users encountering such a site would just go find another one anyway, unless they needed it for work, banking, etc.)

[And no, I didn't trick my parents like that. They're sentient enough that I can explain to them why to use Mozilla instead of IE, and they like it better anyway.]

Hm, so does this mean

[Anonymous Coward]

AOL can now write off on its taxes the development money it spends on mozilla as donations to a nonprofit?

Two Questions:

[Skyshadow]

I have two questions:

1. Why should I give money to Mozilla when I don't give money to and other open-source software I use? Why do they need it? What will they use it for?
2. Would said contribution be tax-deductible (not all non-profit donations are)?

Unfortunately for them, they're competing for my donated dollar against the EFF, the ACLU and (this year) whoever tries to unseat George Bush Jr. They need to make a lot better case for themselves if they're going to warrent a piece of that pie...

Re:Two Questions:

[Skyshadow]

A better question would be: "Why don't you give to the other open-source software projects?"

I figured someone would ask that.

First, you should know that I'm by no stretch of the imagination a rich man. I can pay my bills, make my car payments (I don't drive an expensive car), set aside a little money but that leaves me pretty much broke.

Given that, I have to carefully prioritize where my money goes. Last year, I contributed to the ACLU, the EFF and to my public radio station, KQED. These are all good causes which, in my opinion, do demonstratively good things with my money and they all are tax deductible donations.

That's what any OSS project or company needs to contend with when they look at me for money. To be included on my list, then, they'd better (A) prove they need it, (B) prove they're using it for substantially good reasons and not wasting it, and (C) preferably set things up so I can take a tax deduction for it.

I don't see anything wrong with looking at it that way -- if I had another $5 a paycheck to give away, it'd go to the people on my list, anyhow...

PayPal ??

[matsh]

So, where can I donate PayPal money to this foundation?

Who said they get paid?

[nuntius]

For every $1 a employee gets paid, a company has to shell out at least $2. Where does this money go?

Employee benefits take a huge chunk out of your paycheck - health insurance and the like aren't free - the company has to pay for them. Also, every dollar you pay in taxes is matched by the company - not in some "matching program", but simply in Social Security, unemployment benefits, and other federal taxes.

Then, after all that is said and done, the company gets around to renting/buying office space, buying support hardware, software, and books, shipping developers to conventions, hiring support staff...

Re:$2M kiss-off

[Zathrus]

Why would AOL give Mozilla a $2M kiss-off (assuming that were actually what is happening here) when they could give Mozilla a $0 kiss-off instead?

Someone may have been clued in enough to know that doing so would generate immense ill-will. Besides, Mozilla is a viable product... just not one well suited to AOL/TW's core business (as you say).

Additionally the $2M can be written off for tax purposes. Small, but it doesn't hurt.

I guess the real question is how much funding has AOL given the Mozilla project over the past few years? Is $1M/year an improvement or a reduction in funding? And to be totally cynical -- even if it is an improvement, remember it's only for two years. Will they be able to make up the money if AOL doesn't continue funding after that time period is up?

Honestly, I'd pretty much read this as AOL kicking the project out as well, but unless the above question is answered I can't be sure of that.

Re:free advertising!

[asa]

I've brought this up before, but where's the professional looking attractive banner ad graphics for Mozilla? I'd slap one of those up on my website (I've got pages that attract more than just slash-geeks) and get the word out that way...

I'm not so artistically minded, so I don't want to create it, but I'll certainly display it!

We will be ramping up our marketing efforts over the coming months. In the mean time you could always use plain text and link to http://www.mozilla.org/releases

--Asa

Re:Not quite as funny as intended.

[Gerv]

Not enough to employ fulltime developers, but probably enough for bandwidth costs.

The problem is, we need fulltime developers :-)

Gerv
(gerv@mozilla.org)

Re:Sayonara

[Gerv]

Have to wonder, will netscape in the future have to pay mozilla for the right to produce a closed-source version.

Your question implies that Netscapes 6 and 7 were closed source. This is only partially true - the bits like AIM were closed, but the MPLed bits were open.

In the future, as now, any use of the code by Netscape/AOL will be under the MPL (or another license like the LGPL, if all Mozilla code is available under it, and AOL chooses to use it instead for whatever reason.)

No-one will ever have to pay mozilla.org for the right to use the source. That's what open source means. And no-one will be able to pay anyone for the right to produce a closed-source version - because doing that requires permission from several thousand copyright holders. mozilla.org does not own the copyright to Mozilla.

Gerv

(gerv@mozilla.org)

Re:Not quite as funny as intended.

[scottj]

I make charitable donations every year. I always make sure that my donations go to an organization that is registered as a non-profit so that I can realize tax benefits from my donations. Now I can support my favorite OSS project with these donations. I'm sure that there are many more out there like me as well. Mozilla isn't going to die any time soon.

Re: Support from Microsoft Nemeses

[Azureflare]

One thing that really surprises me (And I mean REALLY surprises me) is the fact that AOL Time Warner doesn't tout Mozilla more. I mean, if people knew that Firebird had excellent popup blocking and other features IE should have, people would switch in an instant! I moved my whole family over to Firebird, and they love it, even though it's still 0.6! They love the simplicity, and they especially love the popup blocking. They don't use Internet Explorer at all anymore, and I think this will continue, especially since Microsoft is going to wait until Longhorn for the next IE upgrade.

That's another thing; there are many issues with IE, as has been noted by many people (CSS, transparent .png, etc. etc.) not to mention popups. I just can't see why people would choose IE if they knew what firebird offered.

I can't help wondering, if people just got the word out, more people would use mozilla, and thereby mozilla would get more money in it's coffers. If mozilla can get a relatively large user base (Say, 10-20%) then I would hope they wouldn't have a problem getting funds.