You may never have heard of the Mozilla Foundation. It's even possible you're not familiar with Firefox but they are seeking to be among the poster children of fund-raising for charities harmed by the abrupt cut-off of funding to USAID, which distributes funds to impoverished communities overseas.
Mozilla may not spring to mind when you think of USAID recipients but today it sent out an urgent email appeal for funding, saying it had already lost "$2.5 million USD in crucial U.S. government funding" and expected to lose another $1.05 million.
And just what are these funds used for? Why is a company that operates a barely-used web browser (market share 2.62% globally) getting more than $3.5 million in taxpayer funds?
Here's Mozilla's description:
- $2.5 million USD — Mozilla’s Responsible Computing Challenge trains future technologists to embed ethics, equity, and public good into technology. Losing this funding risks tech education programs in Kenya, India, and South Africa.
- $1.05 million USD — Mozilla Common Voice is building the world’s largest open-source speech dataset so voice technology understands all languages, accents, and communities. Without funding, marginalized voices may be left behind.
This all sounds fine but it's worth taking note that through a series of interlocking mutual back-scratching deals Mozilla has been collecting millions of dollars annually from Google and other tech companies. Its total annual revenue has at times been more than $450 million.
Its CEO has made nearly $7 million in some years, which critics might say would cover quite a bit of the USAID deficit.
What does Mozilla do to earn this princely sum? It installs Google as the default search engine on its web browser. This would in polite language be called a "referral fee" or, in plainer English, a kickback.
But make no mistake. The Mozilla Foundation is indeed a charity that presents itself as devoted to good works. Its interim CEO is Laura Chambers who recently replaced Mitchell Baker. Chambers' salary has not been released but Baker was paid $6,903,089 in 2022.
Mozilla did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
A little history
The alliance between Google and Firefox was formalized in 2005 and by 2006, Mozilla was reporting that 90% of its $66.8 million iin revenue came from "search royalties," mostly Google.
In 2005, Mozilla entered into a partnership with Google, making Google the default search engine in Firefox. This arrangement significantly boosted Mozilla's revenues. By 2006, approximately 90% of Mozilla's $66.8 million revenue came from search royalties, predominantly from Google, according to Wikipedia.
The partnership was renewed multiple times:
In 2008, the agreement was extended through 2011, TechCrunch reported.
In 2011, a new three-year agreement was signed, reportedly worth nearly $300 million annually, reflecting Firefox's growing market influence, according to Wikipedia.
Diversification efforts
In 2014, Mozilla sought to reduce its financial dependence on Google by partnering with Yahoo!, setting Yahoo! Search as the default in Firefox for North America. This five-year deal was valued at $375 million annually. Despite this shift, Mozilla continued collaborations with other search providers like Yandex in Russia and Baidu in China.
In 2017, Mozilla terminated its agreement with Yahoo! and returned to Google as the default search provider in select regions, including the U.S., Canada, Hong Kong, and Taiwan, Wikipedia said.
By 2020, Wikipedia said Mozilla and Google renewed their partnership, with reports estimating the deal's value between $400 and $450 million annually, ensuring Google's position as the default search engine in Firefox.
Financial, antitrust significance
These search agreements have been vital for Mozilla's finances. In 2018, Mozilla's total revenue was $451 million, with $430 million (over 95%) derived from search partnerships, primarily with Google.
In 2024, amid antitrust scrutiny, Google proposed adjustments to its search agreements, including those with Mozilla, to address concerns over its dominance in online search. These proposed changes aim to make agreements non-exclusive and allow more flexibility for device manufacturers regarding pre-installed apps, Reuters reported.