Mozilla Warns Firefox Could Collapse Without Google Search Deal

Mozilla’s Chief Financial Officer, Eric Muhlheim, recently testified in court about the precarious financial position of Firefox amid the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) antitrust case against Google. The DOJ seeks to restrict Google’s ability to pay for default search engine placements in third-party browsers, including Firefox, which currently generates about 85% of Mozilla’s revenue through its deal with Google.

Muhlheim described the situation as “very frightening,” warning that losing this revenue stream could force Mozilla to make significant cuts across the company. This includes scaling back product engineering investments in Firefox, which could trigger a downward spiral leading to the browser’s potential demise. Firefox accounts for roughly 90% of Mozilla’s revenue, which in turn supports the nonprofit Mozilla Foundation and its open source initiatives.

The DOJ’s proposals include barring Google from paying to be the default search engine and forcing Google to sell its Chrome browser and syndicate search results to competitors. While these measures aim to dismantle Google’s illegal monopoly in search, Mozilla’s testimony highlights unintended consequences: without Google’s payments, Firefox’s financial model is at risk, potentially consolidating market dominance further in Google’s favor.

Mozilla’s Firefox uses the Gecko browser engine, notable for being the only major browser engine controlled by a nonprofit rather than a Big Tech company. This engine was developed to prevent monopolistic control over internet protocols and ensure interoperability across browsers. Losing financial support threatens not only Firefox’s survival but also the broader ecosystem of open web standards and innovation.

Attempts to replace Google with other search providers like Microsoft’s Bing have proven financially insufficient. Mozilla’s internal studies showed that switching Firefox’s default search engine to Bing resulted in significantly lower revenue. Past experiments with Yahoo as the default search engine also led to user dissatisfaction and browser abandonment, underscoring the challenge of finding a viable alternative to Google’s lucrative deal.

While the DOJ envisions a future with multiple competitive search engines vying for default placements, Muhlheim cautioned that such a scenario is hypothetical and would take considerable time to materialize. During this transition, Mozilla would face severe financial strain, potentially forcing drastic operational cuts and threatening Firefox’s viability.

Mozilla acknowledges the risk of over-reliance on a single revenue source and is exploring diversification strategies, including increasing revenue from browser ads. However, its strong commitment to user privacy and a privacy-preserving product approach complicates scaling such alternatives. Mozilla also supports choice screens for browsers but does not favor default search engine choice screens within browsers, emphasizing that “choice is a core value” but must be contextual.

The testimony underscores the complex balance regulators must strike between curbing monopolistic practices and preserving the financial health of competitors that contribute to a diverse and open internet ecosystem. Firefox’s potential collapse would reduce competition in browser engines and search distribution, ironically reinforcing Google’s dominance rather than diluting it.

As the DOJ’s case progresses, Mozilla’s situation highlights the urgent need for sustainable revenue models that do not depend heavily on a single partner. It also raises important questions about how antitrust remedies can be designed to foster genuine competition without inadvertently harming viable alternatives that promote innovation, privacy, and user choice.