[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: revenue sharing agreement with DuckDuckGo

Stefano Zacchiroli writes ("Re: revenue sharing agreement with DuckDuckGo"):
> I've just re-read this whole thread. Helped by the useful input you
> provided in it, I made up my mind and decided to go ahead with the
> agreement, according to the spirit described in the above paragraph.

Thanks.  Thanks also for the exemplary way you've conducted this
decisionmaking process.

> Last but not least, transparency. I don't know, yet, how to answer the
> many "how much" questions that have been asked in the thread. But for
> sure we will have to be public about that once we have an answer. I'll
> check with the auditors and trusted orgs to ensure this kind of
> donations are clearly marked as such.  If at any time we will become
> scared by the amount, we can decide to quit.

I think this last is an important point.  The character of the Mozilla
project has changed considerably, arguably as a result of the influx
of large amounts of money from exactly this kind of source.

So we should keep an eye on this.  If the amount of money gets too big
I suggest we consider forwarding it to some broader charity for whom
it will be less of massive alteration to their finances.  (Eg, EFF,

But in practice I don't think in this case this is likely to be an

> For the same transparency reasons, I also suggest that maintainers of
> the involved packages document where appropriate (e.g. in README.Debian)
> that they have implemented the t=debian query string, and why.

Very sensible.


Reply to: