65 votes

Mozilla CEO: Paid, premium features for Firefox coming this fall

63 comments

  1. [13]
    nothis Link
    Good. Whenever you complain about Facebook or Google, you're complaining about an internet run by advertising money. Paid subscriptions are the only alternative and I'm ready.

    Good. Whenever you complain about Facebook or Google, you're complaining about an internet run by advertising money. Paid subscriptions are the only alternative and I'm ready.

    46 votes
    1. [4]
      lionirdeadman Link Parent
      There's also donations like what Wikipedia does but that generally doesn't fly with for-profit.

      There's also donations like what Wikipedia does but that generally doesn't fly with for-profit.

      15 votes
      1. [3]
        zaarn Link Parent
        Mozilla is a non-profit, sort of. The problem is they get like 100 million $ or so from search deals with Google. And Open Source is generally not as profitable. Wikipedia relies on a shitton of...

        Mozilla is a non-profit, sort of. The problem is they get like 100 million $ or so from search deals with Google. And Open Source is generally not as profitable. Wikipedia relies on a shitton of volunteers to moderate the site, almost nothing is done by the Wikiemedia Foundation (they basically only provide the servers and storage, which isn't that much really).

        7 votes
        1. [2]
          nothis Link Parent
          I heard Wikipedia sits on absurd amount of cash but still asks for donations because they want to put themselves into a position where they have a "fund" that spits out perpetual money through...

          I heard Wikipedia sits on absurd amount of cash but still asks for donations because they want to put themselves into a position where they have a "fund" that spits out perpetual money through some smart investments or something, making them truly independent.

          5 votes
          1. json Link Parent
            No need to rely on hearsay, we can see their accounting. Wikimedia Foundation FY17/18 annual report & a summary on the wikipedia page for the foundation. ...i'm not that versed at reading these...

            No need to rely on hearsay, we can see their accounting.

            Wikimedia Foundation FY17/18 annual report & a summary on the wikipedia page for the foundation.

            ...i'm not that versed at reading these though :p

            8 votes
    2. [5]
      culturedleftfoot Link Parent
      No doubt. I've been patiently waiting for a few different online industries to figure out micro-subscriptions and on-demand micropayments... tbh I thought they would have by now.

      No doubt. I've been patiently waiting for a few different online industries to figure out micro-subscriptions and on-demand micropayments... tbh I thought they would have by now.

      3 votes
      1. KapteinB Link Parent
        Mozilla announced an upcoming collaboration with a micropayments service named Scroll a few months back. Maybe that will be part of Firefox Premium. I'll probably keep using Flattr as well, since...

        Mozilla announced an upcoming collaboration with a micropayments service named Scroll a few months back. Maybe that will be part of Firefox Premium. I'll probably keep using Flattr as well, since they seem to focus on different types of content creators.

        5 votes
      2. [3]
        Bullmaestro Link Parent
        I'd happily pay a subscription for a website like 2010-era Reddit if it meant minimal or zero censorship, plus a boatload of features.

        I'd happily pay a subscription for a website like 2010-era Reddit if it meant minimal or zero censorship, plus a boatload of features.

        1 vote
        1. [2]
          Wes Link Parent
          Inversely, I'd be more supportive of a website with more censorship. /r/AskScience, /r/AskHistorians and co are the only subs I really consider of any value. Subreddits without moderation become...

          Inversely, I'd be more supportive of a website with more censorship. /r/AskScience, /r/AskHistorians and co are the only subs I really consider of any value. Subreddits without moderation become little more than repositories of spongebob memes in the long run.

          13 votes
          1. cfabbro Link Parent
            And zero censorship social media sites are typically filled to the brim with the worst examples of what humanity has to offer, IMO. E.g. Voat is a fucking cesspool.

            And zero censorship social media sites are typically filled to the brim with the worst examples of what humanity has to offer, IMO. E.g. Voat is a fucking cesspool.

            9 votes
    3. [3]
      Bullmaestro Link Parent
      On the subject of websites that surrender to the will of their advertisers, it would be interesting albeit unfeasible to see a paid subscription competitor to Reddit or YouTube. Because imagine...

      On the subject of websites that surrender to the will of their advertisers, it would be interesting albeit unfeasible to see a paid subscription competitor to Reddit or YouTube.

      Because imagine what YouTube would be like without adpocalypses, or Reddit without swathes of subreddits being quarantined because they're deemed 'advertiser unfriendly.'

      1. NaraVara Link Parent
        YouTube has a paid subscriber tier, but the design of the whole platform is based around the logic of sticking ads in your face from top to bottom so it's still kind of annoying. I think it is...

        paid subscription competitor to Reddit or YouTube.

        YouTube has a paid subscriber tier, but the design of the whole platform is based around the logic of sticking ads in your face from top to bottom so it's still kind of annoying.

        I think it is feasible, but you'd need a big push to get content creators on there. Early days YouTube got big because anyone could post to it back in the days when web hosting was more expensive and hard to set up. Short, viral videos was what it was all about. If they want to retain that they could probably just offer paid hosting services for professional YouTubers and a free tier for occasional ones.

        Maybe they could monetize by either allowing the content creators to run their own sponsored ads that they manage themselves or by providing a patreon style "tip jar" service to the videos. (Or some combination of the two.)

        Reddit without swathes of subreddits being quarantined because they're deemed 'advertiser unfriendly.'

        So. . . becoming more ad friendly has arguably made Reddit a less miserably toxic place. Most of the stuff they've booted has been dens of racism and misogyny. I only wish they had taken action in the name of maintaining decent community standards instead of needing to wait until the money told them to jump.

        7 votes
      2. cfabbro (edited ) Link Parent
        While not subscription based, Metafilter has a one-time $5 registration fee, and Tildes could basically be treated that way (I make monthly donations via Patreon/shill). Linus Media Group (company...

        to see a paid subscription competitor to Reddit ...

        While not subscription based, Metafilter has a one-time $5 registration fee, and Tildes could basically be treated that way (I make monthly donations via Patreon/shill).

        or YouTube

        Linus Media Group (company behind Linus Tech Tips) is actually in the process of developing a subscription based competitor to YouTube called Floatplane.

        5 votes
  2. [17]
    cadadr Link
    Nice to hear that they are diversifying their income. An important detail is that this "premium" seems to include peripheral subscription services like VPN or storage, not core browser features,...

    Nice to hear that they are diversifying their income. An important detail is that this "premium" seems to include peripheral subscription services like VPN or storage, not core browser features, so "premium" is a rather misleading term here, this is more like some sort of value-added services.

    26 votes
    1. [16]
      Death Link Parent
      From this bit: I'm guessing they'll maybe offer some kind of integrated proxy/vpn service in-browser which will be limited for free users and unlimited for paid users?

      From this bit:

      "We also tested VPN," Beard said, referring to a test Mozilla ran together with ProtonVPN last fall, in the US.

      "You can imagine we'll offer a solution that gives us all a certain amount of free VPN bandwidth and then offer a premium level over a monthly subscription," the Mozilla exec said.

      I'm guessing they'll maybe offer some kind of integrated proxy/vpn service in-browser which will be limited for free users and unlimited for paid users?

      13 votes
      1. [15]
        mike10010100 Link Parent
        Why not Tor? Why a paid VPN? Would they make a marketplace for VPN providers to hook into the browser?

        Why not Tor? Why a paid VPN? Would they make a marketplace for VPN providers to hook into the browser?

        3 votes
        1. [3]
          dblohm7 Link Parent
          (I’m a Mozilla employee.) I work on one of the teams that cooperates with the Tor project. While we do like to be able to back port Tor Browser features into mainline Firefox, some of the changes...

          (I’m a Mozilla employee.)

          I work on one of the teams that cooperates with the Tor project. While we do like to be able to back port Tor Browser features into mainline Firefox, some of the changes that they make are just too infeasible to do for a general-purpose browser.

          Yes, I know Brave has Tor tabs, but from my experience working directly with the Tor team, I wouldn’t use anything other than the Tor Browser if I cared about my anonymity.

          19 votes
          1. [2]
            mike10010100 Link Parent
            Ah, fair enough! I really appreciate your answer! So would Firefox allow for a marketplace of VPNs, much like the addons system currently does?

            Ah, fair enough! I really appreciate your answer! So would Firefox allow for a marketplace of VPNs, much like the addons system currently does?

            4 votes
            1. dblohm7 Link Parent
              I'm really not sure, sorry. That's something that the busdev types are working on, so lowly engineers like me won't know for a couple of months yet.

              I'm really not sure, sorry. That's something that the busdev types are working on, so lowly engineers like me won't know for a couple of months yet.

              5 votes
        2. Diff Link Parent
          They're already looking to add Tor to the core browser. A VPN is more suited to a paid service like that as opposed to the (I think?) more or less mostly volunteer-run Tor network.

          They're already looking to add Tor to the core browser. A VPN is more suited to a paid service like that as opposed to the (I think?) more or less mostly volunteer-run Tor network.

          11 votes
        3. [8]
          Keegan Link Parent
          AFAIK Tor limits you to 5 kbps or some low speed like that, so a VPN is much better for any type of media browsing.

          AFAIK Tor limits you to 5 kbps or some low speed like that, so a VPN is much better for any type of media browsing.

          1 vote
          1. guywithhair Link Parent
            I don't think this is true. The speeds are limited of course because they have to pass through multiple extra nodes to get back to you, but I don't think there's a hard limit on what you get from...

            I don't think this is true. The speeds are limited of course because they have to pass through multiple extra nodes to get back to you, but I don't think there's a hard limit on what you get from it. More realistically, the speeds are poor because the nodes are often run by volunteers with limited bandwidth

            15 votes
          2. [4]
            zaarn Link Parent
            In most cases, you can stream 720p YouTube over Tor without much issue, there isn't a hard limit other than "what the exit nodes can pass through all the middle nodes to you".

            In most cases, you can stream 720p YouTube over Tor without much issue, there isn't a hard limit other than "what the exit nodes can pass through all the middle nodes to you".

            6 votes
            1. [3]
              Keegan Link Parent
              Hm I must have been mistaken about the rate limiting. But it still is best practice not to use up all the bandwidth so that people who truly need Tor, like those in authoritarian countries, can...

              Hm I must have been mistaken about the rate limiting. But it still is best practice not to use up all the bandwidth so that people who truly need Tor, like those in authoritarian countries, can use it easily.

              1 vote
              1. [2]
                notopygos Link Parent
                I don't think that is a problem these days, there is a lot of unused bandwidth on Tor network and more people using Tor = better for everyone. I am a kid and me along with lots of other normal...

                But it still is best practice not to use up all the bandwidth

                I don't think that is a problem these days, there is a lot of unused bandwidth on Tor network and more people using Tor = better for everyone. I am a kid and me along with lots of other normal people using Tor means the ones who actually need it can use it to hide among normal people.

                3 votes
                1. Keegan Link Parent
                  I see. Thanks for the info.

                  I see. Thanks for the info.

          3. [2]
            notopygos Link Parent
            This is false, Tor doesn't limit anything. It's the exit nodes bandwidth in most cases that is the bottleneck if your connection is fast.

            AFAIK Tor limits you to 5 kbps or some low speed like that

            This is false, Tor doesn't limit anything. It's the exit nodes bandwidth in most cases that is the bottleneck if your connection is fast.

            3 votes
            1. Keegan Link Parent
              Yep. I was mistaken.

              Yep. I was mistaken.

              1 vote
        4. zaarn Link Parent
          Tor costs money to run too, even if it's mainly volunteers. Mozilla could offer a Tor+VPN approach, where Mozilla pays for the VPN and Tor exit nodes to compensate the extra traffic.

          Tor costs money to run too, even if it's mainly volunteers. Mozilla could offer a Tor+VPN approach, where Mozilla pays for the VPN and Tor exit nodes to compensate the extra traffic.

        5. NaraVara Link Parent
          Lots of enterprise and government clients will absolutely not be down with making their business processes reliant on Tor. Even reputation/optics concerns aside, there's lots of...

          Lots of enterprise and government clients will absolutely not be down with making their business processes reliant on Tor. Even reputation/optics concerns aside, there's lots of operational/efficiency problems.

  3. [8]
    Bullmaestro Link
    Shame it's coming this autumn. Next month, my country is implementing a porn block where anybody from the UK will be forced to verify their age using a credit card or form of ID on a porn site....

    Shame it's coming this autumn.

    Next month, my country is implementing a porn block where anybody from the UK will be forced to verify their age using a credit card or form of ID on a porn site. This law has been heavily criticised over privacy and data protection concerns, and it's been predicted that this could drive our youth towards more extreme content rather than protect them from the dangers of porn. Nevertheless, our government has pushed it out anyway because our (soon to be former) Prime Minister Theresa May has been pushing an online censorship agenda.

    I'd sooner give my money to a company like NordVPN or Private Internet Access than surrender my personal details to Mindgeek to be added to their UK-wide wankers' register.

    16 votes
    1. [4]
      notopygos Link Parent
      How did they think this is a good idea?

      verify their age using a credit card or form of ID on a porn site

      How did they think this is a good idea?

      8 votes
      1. zaarn Link Parent
        "What if a child would visit this website!? Absolutely terrible! Make it stop!"

        "What if a child would visit this website!? Absolutely terrible! Make it stop!"

        10 votes
      2. NaraVara Link Parent
        FORCING people to give up PII and financial information to some of the least trustworthy security/privacy actors on the internet? What could go wrong!? How long do you expect it will take before...

        FORCING people to give up PII and financial information to some of the least trustworthy security/privacy actors on the internet? What could go wrong!?

        How long do you expect it will take before some dodgy Russian porn site realizes they have a treasure trove of credit card numbers from various British MPs and cabinet officials?

        10 votes
      3. babypuncher Link Parent
        To be fair this is the same country that thought Brexit was a good idea.

        To be fair this is the same country that thought Brexit was a good idea.

    2. elcuello Link Parent
      This is so unbelievably stupid. It will fail miserably and public. And nobody of those involved will learn anything.

      This is so unbelievably stupid. It will fail miserably and public. And nobody of those involved will learn anything.

      4 votes
    3. [2]
      FeEnthusiast Link Parent
      This will 100% be seriously poorly implemented, like everything else the UK tries to do. Try a visa gift card instead

      This will 100% be seriously poorly implemented, like everything else the UK tries to do. Try a visa gift card instead

      2 votes
      1. babypuncher Link Parent
        I don't think there is a good way to implement this.

        I don't think there is a good way to implement this.

        2 votes
  4. kfwyre Link
    Seems like it might end up being similar to the recently announced Librem One platform. I think Mozilla's in a good place to really leverage their commitment to privacy against Google's rising...

    Seems like it might end up being similar to the recently announced Librem One platform. I think Mozilla's in a good place to really leverage their commitment to privacy against Google's rising hostility towards it, and I'd happily pay for a premium Firefox subscription.

    14 votes
  5. emnii Link
    I'm perfectly fine with this. I use Firefox every single day. It's the first thing I install on a new PC. I donate to Mozilla annually but I'll subscribe for premium Firefox too. Mozilla has a...

    I'm perfectly fine with this. I use Firefox every single day. It's the first thing I install on a new PC. I donate to Mozilla annually but I'll subscribe for premium Firefox too. Mozilla has a mission I very much support.

    11 votes
  6. Deimos Link
    @dblohm7 posted this article from Fast Company separately, which mostly covers the same information, but has a bit of a different angle on it and explains more of the environment around it:...

    @dblohm7 posted this article from Fast Company separately, which mostly covers the same information, but has a bit of a different angle on it and explains more of the environment around it: Mozilla is launching paid, premium features in Firefox

    7 votes
  7. [6]
    weystrom Link
    Can I pay for hw accelerated video on Linux though?

    Can I pay for hw accelerated video on Linux though?

    5 votes
    1. [5]
      notopygos Link Parent
      I don't think they will add those features as premium, I guess it will be like value added services model. For linux/gnu systems look...

      I don't think they will add those features as premium, I guess it will be like value added services model. For linux/gnu systems look @https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Hardware_video_acceleration for hardware video acceleration

      3 votes
      1. [4]
        Diff Link Parent
        Sadly you just can't get hardware accelerated video in Firefox under Linux right now. Even if your system is capable, Firefox isn't built to take advantage of it right now.

        Sadly you just can't get hardware accelerated video in Firefox under Linux right now. Even if your system is capable, Firefox isn't built to take advantage of it right now.

        4 votes
        1. [2]
          notopygos Link Parent
          Oh I don't understand much about that stuff but I think mpv supports it and you can watch any video that can be downloaded with youtube-dl with mpv directly.

          Oh I don't understand much about that stuff but I think mpv supports it and you can watch any video that can be downloaded with youtube-dl with mpv directly.

          3 votes
          1. Diff Link Parent
            You can indeed. There are also extensions to allow you to open links in MPV to play them that way. Few things still get excluded though, mainly DRM-wrapped stuff like Netflix that Youtube-DL can't...

            You can indeed. There are also extensions to allow you to open links in MPV to play them that way. Few things still get excluded though, mainly DRM-wrapped stuff like Netflix that Youtube-DL can't touch.

  8. babypuncher Link
    The headline makes this sound scary when it isn't. It sounds like Mozilla is going to start selling services, which will be accessible with Firefox. I don't see plans for a premium version of the...

    The headline makes this sound scary when it isn't. It sounds like Mozilla is going to start selling services, which will be accessible with Firefox. I don't see plans for a premium version of the Firefox browser here, I see plans to sell a VPN and cloud file storage.

    5 votes
  9. [15]
    stromm Link
    I've waiting decades for the downfall of Mozilla, and this is the first step. It was intended to be free from the start. ALL OF IT. Here's proof that the free version will eventually be abandoned:...

    I've waiting decades for the downfall of Mozilla, and this is the first step.

    It was intended to be free from the start. ALL OF IT.

    Here's proof that the free version will eventually be abandoned: "all current Firefox features would remain free".

    2 votes
    1. [3]
      kdtsh Link Parent
      Firefox is free software and nothing can change that. Some cash that doesn’t come from Google would be good for Mozilla. No need to catastrophise this. If you’re really so worried, fork the project.

      Firefox is free software and nothing can change that. Some cash that doesn’t come from Google would be good for Mozilla. No need to catastrophise this. If you’re really so worried, fork the project.

      12 votes
      1. [2]
        Diff Link Parent
        While I always make sure to vigorously roll my eyes at the doomsayers that lurk around Mozilla news posts, forking really isn't an option for a project as hefty and hard-to-maintain as a web...

        While I always make sure to vigorously roll my eyes at the doomsayers that lurk around Mozilla news posts, forking really isn't an option for a project as hefty and hard-to-maintain as a web browser. Anything more than just a set of patches to the original browser has too high of a cost for anything but a large entity with lots of people. IMO it's a small miracle that PaleMoon hasn't rotted away. It's far, far behind in performance and feature support, of course, but AFAIK there are no crippling security vulnerabilities that make it unusable (although the lack of new web standards can make it occasionally difficult to browse the modern web).

        3 votes
        1. kdtsh Link Parent
          To tell the truth it wasn't a very honest suggestion ... it's not really feasible for many people to fork a project like Firefox as you say. With that being said, there's still Icecat, which may...

          To tell the truth it wasn't a very honest suggestion ... it's not really feasible for many people to fork a project like Firefox as you say. With that being said, there's still Icecat, which may not be as fully featured as Firefox with all the usual addons, but is still as functional and certainly fulfills the requirements of people who want free software which is also free-as-in-free-beer.

          2 votes
    2. [3]
      deing Link Parent
      I'm intrigued, how do you see that phrasing as proof that the current Firefox would be abandoned?

      I'm intrigued, how do you see that phrasing as proof that the current Firefox would be abandoned?

      7 votes
      1. [2]
        stromm Link Parent
        It's right there in the words. Key being current. People at the level of CEO don't just say things in an official statement without it being carefully worded. So taking his words for exactly what...

        It's right there in the words. Key being current.

        People at the level of CEO don't just say things in an official statement without it being carefully worded.

        So taking his words for exactly what they mean, as if he intends them to mean exactly what they mean, this tells me that new features will come at a cost.

        And as we have seen time and again, when a feature is re-coded to "make it better", its no longer considered the same feature.

        Time will tell, and I will admit I'm wrong if it never happens. I estimate 5 years or so though.

        2 votes
        1. j3n Link Parent
          My question is, who cares? What features are they going to add that I care about? As far as I'm concerned, AJAX was the last major thing that I cared about in terms of browser features. Aside from...

          My question is, who cares? What features are they going to add that I care about? As far as I'm concerned, AJAX was the last major thing that I cared about in terms of browser features. Aside from security patches, Firefox is "done" as far as I'm concerned. If they want to add more junk (like Pocket, all the garbage that I had to turn of on the "new tab" page, etc) I'll be more than happy to see it gated off behind a paywall so that I don't have to look at it as long as they don't nag me about it every time I open up the browser.

          2 votes
    3. [7]
      babypuncher Link Parent
      I'm not sure how a non-profit can feasibly run a free VPN or cloud storage service. And honestly, I find this preferable over them continuing to take Google's money. It's not like they're planning...

      I'm not sure how a non-profit can feasibly run a free VPN or cloud storage service. And honestly, I find this preferable over them continuing to take Google's money.

      It's not like they're planning on selling browser features.

      5 votes
      1. [6]
        stromm Link Parent
        Hmm, maybe then they shouldn't. It ceases to be a non-profit when it starts charging money for any of it's products.

        Hmm, maybe then they shouldn't.

        It ceases to be a non-profit when it starts charging money for any of it's products.

        1. babypuncher Link Parent
          Lots of non-profits charge money for products or services. From Wikipedia.

          Lots of non-profits charge money for products or services.

          A nonprofit organization is dedicated to furthering a particular social cause or advocating for a shared point of view. In economic terms, it is an organization that uses its surplus of the revenues to further achieve its ultimate objective, rather than distributing its income to the organization's shareholders, leaders, or members.

          From Wikipedia.

          6 votes
        2. [4]
          cfabbro (edited ) Link Parent
          That's not what non-profit means nor is that how they work. A not-for-profit corporation (at least in Canada) is absolutely allowed to charge for services and products, and they are even allowed...

          It ceases to be a non-profit when it starts charging money for any of it's products.

          That's not what non-profit means nor is that how they work. A not-for-profit corporation (at least in Canada) is absolutely allowed to charge for services and products, and they are even allowed to build reasonable cash reserves, it just has an obligation to reinvest the majority of that profit back into projects that further its mission and aims, amongst other things (like financial transparency, etc).

          4 votes
          1. [3]
            stromm Link Parent
            Yea, poor wording on my part. No excuse. Let me quote some legal wording. "A non-profit organization is a group organized for purposes other than generating profit and in which no part of the...

            Yea, poor wording on my part. No excuse. Let me quote some legal wording.

            "A non-profit organization is a group organized for purposes other than generating profit and in which no part of the organization's income is distributed to its members, directors, or officers."

            "A nonprofit organization is a business that has been granted tax-exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) because it furthers a social cause and provides a public benefit. Donations made to a nonprofit organization are typically tax-deductible to individuals and businesses that make them, and the nonprofit itself pays no tax on the received donations or on any other money earned through fundraising activities. Nonprofit organizations are sometimes called NPOs or 501(c)(3) organizations based on the section of the tax code that permits them to operate."

            Right now, Mozilla makes 95% of its money off royalties from it's using Google (previously Yahoo) as it's search engine. It's not their product, it's Google's. The rest is from investments, grants, donations, but no sales. This is right in their financial reports.

            Creating a product specifically to make income to increase the value of a company, invalidates the non-profit status.

            1. cfabbro (edited ) Link Parent
              I don't think Mozilla would be doing this if it was prohibited or risked invalidating their non-profit status. And this article from SPZ Legal seems to suggest that it wouldn't. According to SPZ,...

              I don't think Mozilla would be doing this if it was prohibited or risked invalidating their non-profit status. And this article from SPZ Legal seems to suggest that it wouldn't. According to SPZ, the only thing selling a product unrelated to the nonprofit’s exempt purposes may do is cause them to be charged an Unrelated Business Income Tax (UBIT) on those sales.

              Generally, a nonprofit may generate income on a tax free basis if the income-generating activity is directly related to its exempt purpose.

              However, income-generating activity may be subject to unrelated business income tax, or UBIT, at the corporate tax rate if the activity is unrelated to the nonprofit’s exempt purposes and it is regularly carried on. Specific exclusions exist for certain types of activities, spelled out in Internal Revenue Code Section 513(a).

              And also worth mentioning is that Mozilla is already arranged in a nonprofit hybrid structure like mentioned in another related SPZ article as a way to circumvent any limitations on revenue generating activities. Mozilla Foundation is a registered non-profit but their subsidiary, Mozilla Corporation, is a for-profit taxable entity. So my guess would be they likely plan on selling the premium services through the Corporation rather than the Foundation anyways, which renders the previous concerns irrelevant.

              3 votes
            2. callmedante Link Parent
              I have to disagree with your conclusion. I work in the world of theatre, which is largely non-profit in the United States. Selling tickets does not invalidate the status of the theatre company,...

              Creating a product specifically to make income to increase the value of a company, invalidates the non-profit status.

              I have to disagree with your conclusion. I work in the world of theatre, which is largely non-profit in the United States. Selling tickets does not invalidate the status of the theatre company, because revenue generated gets reinvested in the various ways in which the company carries out its mission. Likewise, if Mozilla uses the revenue from their premium services to reinvest in their mission, I see no reason why their non-profit status should be invalid.

              3 votes
    4. lionirdeadman Link Parent
      Firefox Premium is different products. Firefox is not only a browser nowadays.

      Firefox Premium is different products. Firefox is not only a browser nowadays.

      3 votes