Let me pay for Firefox!

Community Portal
1

Hi Mozilla community,

I’m a long time Mozilla supporter, I’ve published free (as in freedom) and open-source software, and I desperately want Mozilla to charge for Firefox. If that sounds like a contradiction, please keep reading.

I first became involved with the Mozilla community around 2006. I was active in the Spread Firefox project, where I ran a contest that encouraged others to promote Firefox in the most creative ways they could imagine. In hindsight, I guess it could have been called a guerrilla marketing contest. We had some amazing entries, including, as I recall, a Firefox decal that was installed on a private plane and a giant Firefox banner that was unfurled at a baseball stadium. I also participated, hanging flyers around New York City.

A flyer promoting Firefox hangs on a barricade near the Rockefeller Center Christmas tree in New York City. The flyer reads, "What's your New Year's resolution? / Mozilla Firefox / www.firefox.com / Making the Internet Safer, Faster, Better"
A flyer promoting Firefox hangs on a barricade near the Rockefeller Center Christmas tree in New York City. The flyer reads, "What's your New Year's resolution? / Mozilla Firefox / www.firefox.com / Making the Internet Safer, Faster, Better"2048×1536 325 KB

Later, and for eight years, I was a full-time MoCo employee. It would take too long to summarize those years here, but it was a wonderful experience which I’m genuinely grateful for.

Here’s the point: there was once a time when a paid version of Firefox was unthinkable. Now, I believe it’s essential.

Charging for open-source software may sound hypocritical, but even the Free Software Foundation believes software fees and software freedom are completely compatible. I don’t know of any organization that treats software ethics more seriously than the FSF, and even they support setting reasonable prices. I recommend any skeptics read their full article, but to quote a few lines:

Many people believe that… you should not charge money for distributing copies of software, or that you should charge as little as possible—just enough to cover the cost. This is a misunderstanding… Actually, we encourage people who redistribute free [as in freedom] software to charge as much as they wish or can.

[…]

People sometimes worry that a high distribution fee will put free software out of range for users who don’t have a lot of money. With proprietary software, a high price does exactly that—but free [as in freedom] software is different. With free [as in freedom] software, users don’t have to pay the distribution fee in order to use the software. They can copy the program from a friend.

That’s exactly right! In the world I’m imagining, any user who didn’t want to pay wouldn’t have to. As long as Firefox remained free (as in freedom) and open-source software, as it should, those users could install a fork. They wouldn’t be supporting the product and perhaps they wouldn’t have access to the same customer service or speedy software updates, but using an alternative package would be their right. There are many forks of Firefox already, including LibreWolf (my personal preference), Waterfox, and IceCat, to name just a few. Those wouldn’t be going away.

When I first heard someone propose an idea like this as a thought experiment more than ten years ago, the reaction was intense. I was incredulous. Someone stormed out of the room. Today, things are different. We know what happens when companies rely on ads to fund their operations; does anyone really think Facebook is doing good for the world? That’s the end game: enshittification, addiction, algorithmic bullshit that fuels extremism and outrage, and invasive targeted advertising. That’s the fate I want Mozilla to avoid. Let me pay for Firefox! Let me fund the product directly—not through the Foundation but directly—with my own money. (To be clear, I very much support the Foundation, and it does amazing work, but I want to know this money in particular would directly support Firefox development.)

Today, I happily pay for software (including free and open-source software!) that puts users first, including Proton, Standard Notes, Kagi, and others. I’m fortunate enough to be able to fund products that put users first, but again, anyone who didn’t want to pay wouldn’t have to. Let me pay for Firefox!

Some might worry that people would flock to alternatives if Firefox became a user-funded product. I disagree. In fact, I think the exact opposite is true. Right now, people are leaving because they dislike Mozilla’s business model. Adopt a business model that makes sense—I give you money, you give me a good product—and many of those same people would become customers.

Am I suggesting Mozilla entirely pivot to this business model overnight? Of course not. But at least give us the option. Run an experiment. Publish a version of Firefox with no sponsored content, no telemetry, no Google (by default), and ad-blocking built in. I wouldn’t hesitate to pay.

If Mozilla doesn’t do it, I fear someone else will.

41 Likes
2

Absolutely!

Personally, I’d be ok with opt-in telemetry if the information was used solely within Mozilla for product development.

The red line for me is sharing of telemetry data with advertisers. It’s not about privacy - no degree of anonymisation would make it OK. I want my actions to work against an ad-funded web, and towards how the web should be funded: subscriptions, microtransactions and donations.

5 Likes
4

I’m glad I’m not alone with this. This is something that has been bothering me for years so I want to add my two cents.

A common refrain online is that “no one would pay for a browser,” but this argument has a fundamental flaw: to my knowledge, we have never been given the chance to pay for Firefox. There has never been a serious, official attempt to see if direct user funding could work.

We have a case study right in the Mozilla family: Thunderbird. It is thriving and is currently entirely funded by direct donations[1]. While I understand that the budget and user base for Firefox are of a different magnitude, the principle remains. The success of Thunderbird shows that a dedicated user base is willing to financially support a product they believe in. We don’t know for sure what the outcome for Firefox would be, because it has never been tried.

This leads to a crucial distinction that often gets lost. Currently, we can donate to the Mozilla Foundation, but those funds do not go directly to Firefox development at the Mozilla Corporation. For many of us who want to ensure the browser’s long-term health and independence, this is a significant point of friction.

Personally, I believe two key actions from Mozilla would go a long way in building goodwill and trust with the community:

Firstly, establish a direct donation channel specifically for Firefox development. Let us, the users, invest directly in the browser we use and love. It might not replace other revenue overnight, but it would be a start and a meaningful statement. It would create a future where Firefox could, perhaps one day, be primarily user-funded.

And second, offer an official “no-nonsense” build or a transparent build configurator. Many users turn to forks to get a more streamlined or private experience, which can introduce security risks. An official, easily configurable version would satisfy this need while keeping users within the safety of the Firefox ecosystem.

This is about more than just funding; it’s about transparency and rebuilding the relationship between Mozilla and its users. In recent years, as we’ve seen, the more closed-door approach to decisions has eroded a lot of community trust and goodwill. A direct, user-funded model would be a step towards realigning Mozilla with its community. I often look at a company like GitLab, which operates with a high degree of openness while also being a successful business. It proves working in the open isn’t just an ideal, but a practical possibility.

Thank you for hearing me out. I sincerely hope Mozilla will consider an honest attempt at a direct donation model for Firefox.

7 Likes
5

Saw this thread mentioned on Hacker News.

I would welcome the opportunity to pay for FF.

5 Likes
6

I use Firefox because I don’t believe in an advertising funded web, otherwise I’d still be using chrome. Paying for the cloud features of firefox would make sense to me.

1 Like
7

Sometimes, I feel a strong desire to pay for brilliant software, but if a free option exists, I often end up using it—even though I benefit greatly from these tools. But I support those software providers express their values, or encouraging more people to join the cause of freedom,or charge, or just add some ads.

8

Fully on board with paying for Firefox. For a while I donated to Mozilla but I didn’t feel like my money was going towards FF but a myriad of other (frankly zany-sounding) projects.

3 Likes
9

Couple thoughts on this.

I agree, I would absolutely love to pay for Firefox, however, I would not make the choice to do so right now. Reason being, they get so much revenue from Google for what I call “Default Search Engine” shenanigans. (Mozilla and Google Sign New Agreement for Default Search in Firefox). I have little faith that Mozilla has the will and/or ability to compete with Google directly. Until that changes, I can’t justify supporting Firefox financially.

There are other ways to pay for value. One is, Mozilla does have the Mozilla VPN which you can pay for. So if you want to financially support the organization, that is one option. But I am unsure at the moment how that revenue would be allocated internally at Mozilla. If it’s an entirely different business unit, Firefox may not benefit from it.

Secondly, and I don’t mean for this to sound accusatory in any way, I believe in Mozilla as an organization, but I worry about Mozilla adopting the model that many media companies are currently using. That is, we let you pay for a product that respects its customers, and then sometime later, enshittification ensues anyway. So now, you’re paying a fee to use the product, and you’re still suffering from the consequences of surveilance capitalism anyway.

It seems to me that completely free alternatives are the only way consumers have to punish companies for this kind of behavior. If only more consumers had the knowledge and the will to make such choices, it might be more effective.

11

Landing here just now.
Would be nice to have a banner in Wikipedia style asking for funding.

Keeping Firefox free, and asking for donations once in a while

12

This old post is making the round it seems… anyway yes I’ve often thought over the past few years that I would love to spend money to keep Firefox going and prevent enshittification. A Wikipedia-like donation-prompting model may work but frankly, I would prefer a “premium version” model, where paying a subscription unlocks extra features and support.

13

As a Proton Paid User I agree. 10 or 20 years ago I couldn’t afford to pay for something useful but as I climb up the corpo ladder I tend to services that put me first, keep my stuff private (as best they can crackers want to crack things), and not sell my data to others.

I would happily pay for Firefox if I had these basic guarantees.

1 Like