Trending

Mozilla Renews Firefox Search Royalty Deal With Google

By

Mozilla surprised the Internet today and announced that it has renewed its search box license with Google being the default search provider by three years until 2014.

Mozilla CEO Gary Kovacs seemed to be especially happy about the deal as he tweeted that it is "a great day for the web."

Given the fact that Mozilla's livelihood depends on Google's search revenues, it is good news that Mozilla was able to renew the agreement. There is no information how much money Google paid to Mozilla in 2011, but we know that 84 percent of $121.1 million in licensing fees in 2010 came from Google. There was some speculation that Google may have ditched Mozilla, but Firefox still holds somewhere between 20 and 25 percent browser market share and it would be foolish for Google to let that go and allow Microsoft to pick up that share for Bing. Search remains Google's core revenue source and as long as Mozilla has substantial share it is unlikely that Google will drop Mozilla.

Mozilla said it signed a "significant and mutually beneficial revenue agreement with Google." Gary Kovacs added that "this new agreement extends our long term search relationship with Google for at least three additional years." There was no information on the financial terms, but it seems that Mozilla's funding has been secured until the end of 2014, which should give the organization breathing room to build up its browser platform strategy.

18 Comments Comment from the forums
  • amk-aka-Phantom 21 December 2011 11:23
    allow Microsoft to pick up that share for Bing

    Anyone noticed how outrageously similar Bing is to Google in terms of looks? It's practically a clone :D

    Good to see that FF will live for now, 20 to 25% "market" share? IDC, Chrome can't replace Firefox for me and as long as FF doesn't try to copy Chrome's model too much (dumbed down GUI, advertised superior speed and real speed equal to FF's, stuffing the browser into every other application download), I'll just keep using it.
    Reply
  • nikorr 21 December 2011 11:44
    Its only common sense for Google to keep paying Mozilla, as it keeps IE going down...
    Reply
  • dotaloc 21 December 2011 11:46
    @amk-aka-Phantom
    c'mon...gui comment, check...stuffing browser (and serious advertising for it)...check...advertised speed = ff speed? really?

    they have won TH browser grand prix quite often. even if a few hundred milliseconds don't feel like an unreasonable wait to you, the numbers do add up, overall...and while benchmark numbers can be manipulated, you can view the source data and draw your own conclusions.

    that said, you like ff...keep using it. if you are trying to refute some benchmarks or cite bogus claims in advertising, bring some numbers so that we all may be better informed!
    Reply
  • richboyliang 21 December 2011 12:41
    as if i wouldn't use google anyways!
    Reply
  • Microgoliath 21 December 2011 16:15
    @ amk-aka-phantom

    On my PC chrome is a lot faster, not on searches but on it actually starting. FF keeps popping up stuff, tweak this, add that and once I'm actually done with all that it still takes longer to start.

    Also "dumbed down GUI" what do you use as your search engine, the "dumbed down" google? or the cramped up Yahoo?

    On topic: Good to hear for Mozilla, I want them to stick around :>
    Reply
  • digiex 21 December 2011 16:19
    Win-win situation on both side, Mozilla gets the money, Google double its exposure in the browser wars.
    Reply
  • amk-aka-Phantom 21 December 2011 16:29
    dotaloc@amk-aka-Phantomc'mon...gui comment, check...stuffing browser (and serious advertising for it)...check...advertised speed = ff speed? really? they have won TH browser grand prix quite often. even if a few hundred milliseconds don't feel like an unreasonable wait to you, the numbers do add up, overall...and while benchmark numbers can be manipulated, you can view the source data and draw your own conclusions.that said, you like ff...keep using it. if you are trying to refute some benchmarks or cite bogus claims in advertising, bring some numbers so that we all may be better informed!
    That's the only thing Chrome is good for, benchmarks. On my PC, they take the same time to start and load pages.

    MicroGoliath@ amk-aka-phantomOn my PC chrome is a lot faster, not on searches but on it actually starting. FF keeps popping up stuff, tweak this, add that and once I'm actually done with all that it still takes longer to start.Also "dumbed down GUI" what do you use as your search engine, the "dumbed down" google? or the cramped up Yahoo?On topic: Good to hear for Mozilla, I want them to stick around :>
    FF doesn't bother me with anything, but Chrome does, so I waste time. Search engine is a simple tool (on the outside), thus the UI needs to be simple. Browser is NOT simple - at least I don't want it this way.
    Reply
  • 21 December 2011 17:49
    I do not think Bing looks much like Google. The wonderful picture backgrounds for one thing vs Google's bland white background? I mean how much different can a search page be? While I tend to check results from both Bing and Google when doing a search. I find Bing just as relevant as Google much of the time.
    I think more importantly for Mozilla is this takes the revenue concern and puts it behind Mozilla. But they still have to deal with Chrome taking more users from Firefox.
    Reply
  • mrmaia 21 December 2011 18:26
    Great news! I think Google search is superior to Bing the same way I think FF is superior to Chrome and IE. Keep it coming!

    PS: That's A LOT of money for a search box!
    Reply
  • freggo 21 December 2011 18:50
    Glad to hear the deal was renewed.
    Firefox has some issues lately, but it would be a shame to see them go under.
    As for the Chrome browser, I'm not to happy with it.
    Minimalist interface -which I kinda like-, but still wasting a boatload of pixel-estate in the top section.
    But they are up to version "16". Laugh.
    Guys, spend less time deciding on new version numbers and more time on making browsers compatible.
    If I have a fairly basic webpage and it looks different in each browser something is not right. As a web designer I would rather have consistent rendering results than some new gizmo effect and yet another new version number.
    Reply