Mozilla Firefox

[Awoke]

I was hit with a "Congratulations, your version of Firefox is up to date" window just now. There was a yes/no question in the corner, which i chose to answer.

"Did you know FireFox is created by a non-profit group?"
No.

Long story short, there is a link to a minute and a half video that Mozilla put together, here (http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/11.0/whatsnew/), and after watching it, I can't help but wonder, how do they make money to pay all those people in the video?

http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/11.0/whatsnew/

[Cebu_4_2]

The video says their time is donated.

[osoab]

I got updated yesterday. I forgot to turn off auto updates. Tools, Options, Updates.

[chad]

firefox is essentially run/owned by google.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13739_3-9776759-46.html

that article is 5 years old. it's worse now.

[Awoke]

That would explain how they can afford to have so many people working for them. People who have bills, and wouldn't be able to work for free.

[SLV^GLD]

It has been co-opted as of a few years ago.

It really did begin as a grass-roots developer donated concept.

To continue propagating the idea that it continues to operate according to its heritage is disingenuous.

[beefsteak]

I was hit with a "Congratulations, your version of Firefox is up to date" window just now. There was a yes/no question in the corner, which i chose to answer.

"Did you know FireFox is created by a non-profit group?"
No.

Long story short, there is a link to a minute and a half video that Mozilla put together, , and after watching it, I can't help but wonder, how do they make money to pay all those people in the video?

Awoke,
perhaps the following elucidations will help...

A non-profit organization is a separate USA, Internal Revenue Service tax code defined, corporate entity. These groups are primarily organized under one of 4 categories:
--service groups,
---fraternal organizations,
----education groups, which include your colleges, universities, etc.,
-----philanthropic groups.

They may or may not be tax-exempt organizations, it depends upon their stated purposes when organizing under this section of the IRS tax code. Many fund raising events organized to generate cash flow through to the stated non-profit purpose have designated "caps" below which IRS taxes are not collected.

An example that comes to mind of this capping is one with which I'm personally familiar:
A not-for-profit local thespian group runs a concession stand to help generate revenues to offset costs of operating the live-theatre productions by amateurs. In a 12 month period of time, there (formerly) was a $10,000 NET PROFIT cap on concession generated profits, placed upon the NFP by IRS regs which separated what was taxable and was tax sheltered by said NFP thespian group in their annual tax return/reporting period.

The actors got paid, and so did all the ancillary support staff. Some years better than others.

Make no mistake: NFP's make profits. Many of them ENORMOUS profits. But they are limited by IRS tax treatment definitions as to whether they can enrich any one person within their cash-flow structure.

And when they dissolve, their liquidated assets' proceeds must be designated and funneled to another non-profit organization.

If a non-profit is tax-exempt, their fund raising proceeds are classified as a "deduction" allowable on the donor's tax return. This "tax shelter"reduces amount of taxes due and owing upon filing by said individual as well as corporations filing annual tax returns. In fact, many corporations "match" individual contributions, the tax treatment is so
favorable to the "generous" corporation.

A third distinction is that the financial results of non-profits are NOT required to be made publicly available during any reporting period. These are normally treated secretively and very VERY difficult to get ahold of, examine or expose, in order to learn who is donating or paying them for their services or "product."

Non-profit examples
One example is a 501(c)(3) corporation tax code category--churches are listed under this IRS tax code section.

GATA is an example of another tax-sheltered not-for-profit organization, purportedly an educational functionary who has major political focus. They have generated copious amounts of monies for several years now in their pursuit of visibility on various matters regarding precious metals chicanery.

Goodwill Industries --a major thrift store network-- is also a 501(c)(3) corporation. Their primary revenue streams are garnered from selling free to them "donations" which are then sold for a profit through their network of retail stores. It's what they "do" with their profits that qualifies them for their non-profit tax code treatment.

Many filthy rich people--Bill and Melinda Gates, Warren Buffet, etc., have created not for profit (philanthropic) Foundations for the ostensible purpose of "giving away a portion of the gargantuan profits" that accrue to them as business principals and generated by conducting "regular corporation" capitalistic business. These type of tax-sheltered organizations have open influence peddling agendae which would make the normal man or woman shudder to discover they were openly supporting by their donations through their funneled monies. B&MGates Foundation --a NFP--is organized to bring innovations in health benefits... for whom anyone outside looking in would naturally wonder. Under that noble sounding umbrella/mission statement focus lies their vaccinations promotions, for one example.

Woodmen of the World, a majorly profitable NFP insurance company in this nation is another example. Some of their generated cash flow is funneled through to seeing eye dog projects, and retirement homes they own, and other private charities they acknowledge as having corollary purposes for the "greater good," etc.

Perhaps you've heard of Glenn Beck? He recently left the TV public genre' vis a vis the FOX network, after having chased much of George Soros' (spooooky dude) Not For Profit nuances and permutations, primarily by pulling on the string which led him down the rabbit hole.
Pulling "That string" was his ultimate undoing...it was Soros' "Media Matters for America" TAX-EXEMPT NFP.

I for one, cannot conceive of anyone needing less profits sheltering than Soros or Gates or Buffet. LOL

And yes, NFP can birth baby NFPs as well as For Profit sub-sections within their corporate umbrella/tax code designation. It's all quite intertwined.

The USA south of your border is full of these "sheltered" groupings.

This "not for profit" tax code categorical designation is a primarily enormous deep and dark rabbit hole in the eyes of many who object to their preferential tax code treatment and non-transparent accounting.

Clear as mud?


beefsteak

[Awoke]

Great post, Beef. Thanks for taking the time!!

[sirgonzo420]

well what browser is worth using then?

[SLV^GLD]

Why would firefox not be worth using?

Opera is pretty awesome and you get what you pay for. There are multitudes of free and open source browsers that suck in different ways, again you get what you pay for. You are always welcome to write your own.

In terms of "worth", which is subjective, I find firefox "worth" using.

[sirgonzo420]

Why would firefox not be worth using?

Opera is pretty awesome and you get what you pay for. There are multitudes of free and open source browsers that suck in different ways, again you get what you pay for. You are always welcome to write your own.

In terms of "worth", which is subjective, I find firefox "worth" using.

Fair enough.

I guess a better way to phrase it would be to ask "are there any free browsers that google *doesn't* own?".

[SLV^GLD]

The question should be furthered qualified with terms such as "cross-platform" and "does not suck" so that the answer could be a qualified "NO".

[sirgonzo420]

The question should be furthered qualified with terms such as "cross-platform" and "does not suck" so that the answer could be a qualified "NO".

Thank you for further polishing my query.

I figured as much.

[madfranks]

That would explain how they can afford to have so many people working for them. People who have bills, and wouldn't be able to work for free.

Disregarding Firefox, there are tons of open source software that have been created voluntarily by groups of unpaid volunteers.

http://sourceforge.net/

[beefsteak]

Sorry, madfranks...
but your claim of "groups of unpaid volunteers" sitting around creatively coding" .....
what for...for the thrill up their leg?

What's in it fer them, pray tell...

People with your considerable skill set don't create open source browsers altruistically. I'm gagging on this one....

There is ALWAYS pay...sometimes, it's NON-intrinsic.

[vacuum]

Firefox is still open source though. Chrome isn't. So any sort of tracking built into firefox should be apparent.

[FreeEnergy]

Top sponsors for Firefox were Google and IBM. At the beginning you could even see this in scrolling Credits of Contributors on About page. Then the word got out, and it was "uncool" for them to be on that list.

How do they make money? Google pays for being default search provider. The millions it paid were peanuts compared to what they got in term of statistics for 20% of the web browsing in the whole world.That, and they make BILLIONS on these browsers, so it is worth while.

[chad]

Top sponsors for Firefox were Google and IBM. At the beginning you could even see this in scrolling Credits of Contributors on About page. Then the word got out, and it was "uncool" for them to be on that list.

How do they make money? Google pays for being default search provider. The millions it paid were peanuts compared to what they got in term of statistics for 20% of the whole web. That, and they make BILLIONS on these browsers, so it is worth while.

free energy put it better than i did.