HNers say this often but nobody has ever freaking pointed to anything. They have stood against some of Google's decisions like their web DRM, which is great! But I do wonder if any lower-profile changes might have been pushed through on Google's request. >Its concerning to me though because that means Google has influence in Firefox, so 'using the alternative' still means being affected by Google's decision making. Exceedingly few Foundations work that way without doing something akin to what Mozilla does. On the other hand the Mozilla Corp has to exist because otherwise it would be legally challenging to do a lot of things they need to do such as business deals.
They can't take money given to a 501c3 charitable organization and use it to fund the expenses of a for-profit corporation (Mozilla Corp). >but very little of the money given to them goes to the browser itself or even their research projects
