It seems like the creation of the corporation is so that they can do things more "officially." So instead of the way companies like IBM participate in certain OSS effort, (that is, give some money and provide some developers and then get some not so tengible assets, such as "influence" of the development direction), a company like Google can say... consult me on the browser source code and I will give you this much money... or put in this feature in firefox and I will give you this much money... (and this is perfectly fine right? as long as they keep the product open source...)
Now I have no problem with this move in and of itself since this is not the first time OSS is used this way. It's perfectly fine, even if someone just uses the Mozilla code and build a viral-type marketing vehicle out of it. (and let's face it folks, there are more sophisticated marketing method than pop-up ads...Netscape being a commercial brand of Mozilla also have pop-up blocker... and You don't think this can happen? Who's going to stop? Moz Corp don't even have public shareholder to answer to.) However, was this a long term strategic move of some people within MoFo? Is this why there was a need to put all the supports behind Firefox and stop development on Seamonkey when there's clearly an audience for it? Is that what it takes for firefox and the like to be commercially viable (by having more resource for faster time-to-market)?
Again... if someone comes along and did this all by themselves without using Mozilla Foundation's resources and its legitimacy I wouldn't really care. But this really feels like a hijacking for me. May be having all after tax profit going back to MoFo will make me feel better.
Slashdot Mirror
From what I read here: (got the link from mozillazine)D ept.1202pg.57.htm
http://www.nysscpa.org/cpajournal/2001/1200/dept/
It seems like the creation of the corporation is so that they can do things more "officially." So instead of the way companies like IBM participate in certain OSS effort, (that is, give some money and provide some developers and then get some not so tengible assets, such as "influence" of the development direction), a company like Google can say... consult me on the browser source code and I will give you this much money... or put in this feature in firefox and I will give you this much money... (and this is perfectly fine right? as long as they keep the product open source...)
Now I have no problem with this move in and of itself since this is not the first time OSS is used this way. It's perfectly fine, even if someone just uses the Mozilla code and build a viral-type marketing vehicle out of it. (and let's face it folks, there are more sophisticated marketing method than pop-up ads...Netscape being a commercial brand of Mozilla also have pop-up blocker... and You don't think this can happen? Who's going to stop? Moz Corp don't even have public shareholder to answer to.) However, was this a long term strategic move of some people within MoFo? Is this why there was a need to put all the supports behind Firefox and stop development on Seamonkey when there's clearly an audience for it? Is that what it takes for firefox and the like to be commercially viable (by having more resource for faster time-to-market)?
Again... if someone comes along and did this all by themselves without using Mozilla Foundation's resources and its legitimacy I wouldn't really care. But this really feels like a hijacking for me. May be having all after tax profit going back to MoFo will make me feel better.