There was a resistance to using Pocket, because it's a closed proprietary service. Now Mozilla plan to open source it, for which they had to buy it first. So it's a good outcome IMHO.

Now all they need to do is make it self-hostable.

I'm with you!

I know there's wallabag, but i always felt it was too hefty for self-hosting on, say, a small digital ocean vps. I've been using Shaarli [https://github.com/shaarli/Shaarli] because its so lean, and easy/quick to set up...though admittedly it is also lean on features (which i'm cool with, but others might want more). My hope is that pocket - once made to be self-hostable - is easy and lean to self-host on a small vps.

...Though even if its not as lean and easy to set up, the fact that pocket will now/soon be added to the open source world is always a win!

I ran wallabag with nginx, fastcgi and sqlite on servers shittier than cheapest DO instances and haven't had any problems. Sure it may be slightly heavier than scp'ing and running a single go binary but compared to the likes of rails or java apps this setup as light as it gets.

wallabag is an alternative that's self-hostable

It is weird - the press release itself notes that this is the first such acquisition Mozilla has ever made.

In their defense, it won't be the first time they've gotten into operating a service -- there's Sync, for instance. So if they see expanding FF's bookmarking abilities as a key strategic differentiator, buying an existing read-it-later service they're already familiar with could be a simpler/cheaper way of getting there than building one from scratch.

First acquisition but not first investment. For example see https://blog.mozilla.org/press-uk/2016/08/23/mozilla-makes-s...

Mozilla also joined Everything.me's Series C funding round:

https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2012/11/28/mozilla-invests-in-...

Too bad sync kind of sucks... Just yesterday I was looking at a recipe on my desktop and then I opened Firefox on my phone and tried to get at the link without emailing or messaging myself and it only showed sync'd tabs from over a week ago.

There is an option in `about:config` for that -- `services.sync.sendTabToDevice.enabled`, disabled by default. Suggest you to enable it and try it out.

This is Mozilla corporation, which l, while being a subsidy of the foundation, is a corporation regardless.

Right, I thought pocket was actually one of the Mozilla sponsors, given the default installation in Firefox.

It was stated several times that Mozilla didn't get any money from Pocket for the integration.

That much is unclear. http://www.ghacks.net/2015/12/05/mozilla-has-a-revenue-share...

Wow, if that article is true then not only were Mozilla [indirectly] taking money for the integrations but they also lied to us all about it.

Is there corroboration that Mozilla had/has revenue sharing with Pocket and Telefonica? I've always trusted Mozilla, this suggests that trust has been badly misplaced.

I can't help but feel that I'm being suckered somewhere here - who from Mozilla is benefiting personally out of this acquisition and why are they being allowed to steer the ship?

It's 14 months since that blog post, I realise it's not news to some, but it's really disappointing to me.

Mozilla releases their financial reports about two years after any given financial year, so we should soon know for sure and I also just really can't imagine them having lied as a result of that.

IMO the simple reality is they need to diversify their income sources to avoid putting all their eggs in one basket, and they decided Pocket makes sense. I'm still a huge Mozilla fan, the whole Pocket episode is not a big deal to me.

Where did Mozilla say that they didn't have revenue sharing with those?

In that article the Mozilla spokesman says that they had no financial interest in the integration of Pocket. If they get revenue from customers introduced through the integration that seems like a barefaced lie.

>Chad Weiner, Mozilla's director of project management told PC World in an email back then that "there [was] no monetary benefit to Mozilla from the integration" and that Pocket "didn't pay for placement in the browser". (ibid) //

vs.

>Although the company emphasizes that Pocket and Telefonica didn’t pay for placement in the Firefox browser, Mozilla Corp. chief legal and business officer Denelle Dixon-Thayer told WIRED that Mozilla has revenue sharing arrangements with both companies. (Wired, as quoted ibid) //

They seem directly conflicting statements to me barring a monumental coincidence. Even if it were considered not contradictory, per se, then it's highly misleading. If I say "I wasn't paid to write this car review" and it turns out I get a cut of sales of the cars ... pretty fraud-y.

At the time, this was the most baffling aspect to me; it would've been more understandable if Pocket were paying Mozilla for the preinstall, but Mozilla opting to corrupt their own ideals of an open web without any monetary gain was mind-boggling.

Now it makes at least some sense.

They invested a million or so in Everything.me a few years ago for Firefox OS. I don't think they've actually acquired another company, though, or at least not any company of note.