new | show | ask | jobs Github

johannes1234321 6 hours ago

There are however two options available:

* Make the browser development the charitable work, or

* accept funding to non-charitable company

However Mozilla earns "enough" from Google, so they don't have to try to make either work.

▲

pavon 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Make the browser development the charitable work

They probably cannot do this. The IRS generally does not consider writing open source software to meet the requirements of a 501c3, for example [1]. They aren't super consistent about it so some groups have gotten 501c3 exemption in the past, but for the most part there is a reason that 501c3 open source foundations focus on support activities, conferences, and not software development.

> accept funding to non-charitable company

They could do this, just like they did for Thunderbird, and I wish they would.

[1] https://www.mill.law/blog/more-501c3-rejections-open-source-...

▲

fstarship 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The Bevy game is an example on an organisation that has gotten 501c

▲

babypuncher 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Maybe we can make a deal with the government. In exchange for making the development of open source software a tax exempt charitable work, we remove private jets from the list of purchases that can be deducted from income taxes. Seems like a win-win.

	▲	pseudalopex 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Why would the government wish to remove private jets from the list of purchases that can be deducted from income taxes? Why would they be unable to do this without making a deal with people who want open source software development to be designated a charitable purpose? How would making a deal with people who want open source software development fix this?

▲

alwa 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Why isn’t the browser development organized as charitable work?

From the Corp’s Wikipedia page [0]:

> As a non-profit, the Mozilla Foundation is limited in terms of the types and amounts of revenue it can have.

Is this an oblique way of saying they couldn’t take Google bucks that way?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation

▲

hrimfaxi 6 hours ago | parent [-]

Yes. https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/unrelated-business...

	▲	amadeuspagel 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> Even though an organization is recognized as tax exempt, it still may be liable for tax on its unrelated business income. So, they could still take Google's payment and they would still have to pay taxes on it?

▲

glenstein 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>Make the browser development the charitable work

I don't think there's a legal way to fund development form the profitable venture and also accept charitable donations.

I'm sure if donations were more a better bet than search licensing they might go that way, but as I said in a different comment, the biggest annual donor drive in the world is probably Wikipedia, probably a best case scenario for that kind of drive, and it brings in less than half of what their search licensing gets.

▲

FuriouslyAdrift 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Then they wouldn't be able to pay their CEO $7 million a year...

	▲	glenstein 5 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Search revenue minus the cost of a CEO (slightly more than 1% of that goes to the CEO) is still an amazing deal, dramatically more than what's likely on offer in terms of charitable giving. They would basically have to execute the largest donation drive in the history of the internet and replicate it on a yearly basis to replace search licensing.
	▲	OkayPhysicist 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Frankly, they probably could. That's a pretty middle-of-the-road salary for a CEO of a significant nonprofit.