On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 05:05:34PM -0400, Paul M Foster wrote: > On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 03:52:10PM -0400, John J. Foster wrote: > > > http://www.scroogle.org/gscrape.html#ffox > > > > Just wondering if anyone had heard of this. Although, if true, it > > certainly doesn't surprise me with todays corporate ethics as they are. > > Just a bad mark on Mozilla. > > > > I'm trying to figure out what's wrong with this. Google pays Mozilla to > make Google the default search engine for Firefox. Mozilla could have > made it Yahoo or someone else, but Google paid them and that's bad? This > seems the same to me as Ford offering a television show free cars so > that whenever you see a car in the show, it's a Ford. This is as old as > advertising itself. > > Mind you, all the link has is rumor and innuendo to go on. No solid > proof. A supposed insider blogger makes an accusation, they ask for > corroborating documents which haven't yet been filed, and the principals > have no comment for them. They've interpeted the silence of those > involved to mean their "guilt". Despite the fact that they aren't > _required_ to disclose any information about the matter, either way, > except perhaps in quarterly filings. While they may indeed be "guilty", > this is scant evidence to even make such an accusation, much less grant > it any credence. > I did not mean in any way to try and pass off accusations and inuendoes as statements of fact. That is the reason I asked in the first place.
But I strongly disagree with much of what you said regarding these actions, if true, being OK. Even "IF" only one of those allegations are true, I'm disappointed in Mozilla's choices. They were, until a few days ago, "non-profit". Google may be the best general purpose search engine out there right now, but "IF" Mozilla made it the default for cash, I have a problem with that. If Mozilla knows that a Google search deposits cookies from sites never visited, I have a problem with that. IF anything in that article is true, and you think that that type of underhandedness (is that a word?) and deception is OK, fine. I don't. John -- Contrary to the lie machine, the world is not safer.
pgp616xKMfC8o.pgp
Description: PGP signature
