Serious Discussion Brave 1.0 is now six years old

[Marko :)]

The same workaround used by Brave, which is loading the desktop site to retrieve the video as a standard media object, works on Firefox, Vivaldi, etc. They're not abusing APIs.

You could guess that it has to do with integration with Brave Shields (privacy tools), the built-in option of rewarding YouTube creators, and First Amendment protections for adblocking—Garcia v. Google (2015) upheld users' rights to control what loads on their device. Brave obviously has quite a bit of weight compared to little apps.

Perhaps this apparent exception raises eyebrows. I won't lean too hard into speculation.

NewPipe basically scrapes YouTube site, it doesn't use their API yet it's banned from Play Store. Kiwi Browser back then got warning it will be removed from Play Store if they don't remove option for background playback because of YouTube. There were multiple cases like this where Google either took down apps or warned developers because they enabled background playback on YouTube.

On the other side you have Brave that blocks ads on YouTube and advertises itself this way, has option for background playback and even has option to open all YouTube links directly in the browser. And Google is silent. You have to admit it's a little sketchy.

The built-in option of rewarding YouTube creators...

That can't be the reason. Brave literally replaced Google's ads with their own and didn't pay the creators if they didn't partner with them.

 

[ForgottenSeer 116559]

NewPipe basically scrapes YouTube site, it doesn't use their API yet it's banned from Play Store. Kiwi Browser back then got warning it will be removed from Play Store if they don't remove option for background playback because of YouTube. There were multiple cases like this where Google either took down apps or warned developers because they enabled background playback on YouTube.

On the other side you have Brave that blocks ads on YouTube and advertises itself this way, has option for background playback and even has option to open all YouTube links directly in the browser. And Google is silent. You have to admit it's a little sketchy.

View attachment 293065

That can't be the reason. Brave literally replaced Google's ads with their own and didn't pay the creators if they didn't partner with them.

Yes, these pieces of information are true. However, surely you aren't incredulous enough that you can't imagine competent lawyers building a formidable case defending users' rights to load YouTube videos as standard media objects. The ability to reward content creators is part of Brave's ethos and overall defense of their business. Most Android apps don't enjoy a legal team and ample revenue streams like Brave does.

 

[n8chavez]

Actually, I was a very long time Brave user; I'm still using Brave on Android as it's perfect for me there. I switched to Firefox a year ago or so as I find it way better and faster than any other Chromium web browser out there. It was always a plan for me to switch to more private browser and Firefox simply ticked all the boxes for me. Initially, I had issues with it that seemed unsolvable so I kept both Brave and Firefox, until I fixed the issues and now Firefox is the only web browser I have installed on my PC; my first and only choice.

Firefox far from "slowly decaying corpse" or dead. We're talking about Mozilla's flagship product; product that made them famous. What iPhone is to Apple, that's Firefox to Mozilla. Even if Google pulls out from financing Mozilla, they will always find a way to keep their flagship product afloat, even if that means shutting down every other business. In reality, Google will never stop paying Mozilla just how they'll never stop paying Apple; this could land them in serious trouble. Paying for default search engine in browser with less than 3% marketshare is just an excuse for paying them to be a competitor in the field—nothing else.

Could you link where gorhill said uBO is going away in favor of uBO Lite? The only thing I could find is him saying he'll keep these projects separate. Nothing else.

That is suspicious. There must be some kind of deal between Brave and Google we don't know about.

You do know that the sole reason Mozilla still exists is because Google pays them to have their search as default, right? Google gives Mozilla like 80% of it's budget. Once Google decides it's done with Mozilla, Mozilla will have to cease operations. When your budget comes from a competitor, and you have 2.37% market share, I consider that dying.

 

[Marko :)]

You do know that the sole reason Mozilla still exists is because Google pays them to have their search as default, right? Google gives Mozilla like 80% of it's budget. Once Google decides it's done with Mozilla, Mozilla will have to cease operations. When your budget comes from a competitor, and you have 2.37% market share, I consider that dying.

I do, but what makes you think Google will ever stop paying Mozilla? Beside, from what I understand, Mozilla has been trying to diversify their income to not rely solely on Google.

As I already said, Google isn't paying them without a reason. If they stop paying Mozilla, Google becomes a monopoly with their anti-competitive practices. That's illegal. Just remember when Google ended up in court and payments to Mozilla came into question; Google and Mozilla both agreed that these payments shouldn't stop. Google doesn't pay Mozilla for Google to be default search engine; it pays Mozilla because it has to. Otherwise, Google could be hefty fined.

 

[n8chavez]

I do, but what makes you think Google will ever stop paying Mozilla? Beside, from what I understand, Mozilla has been trying to diversify their income to not rely solely on Google.

As I already said, Google isn't paying them without a reason. If they stop paying Mozilla, Google becomes a monopoly with their anti-competitive practices. That's illegal. Just remember when Google ended up in court and payments to Mozilla came into question; Google and Mozilla agreed that these payments shouldn't stop. Google doesn't pay Mozilla for Google to be default search engine; it pays Mozilla because it has to. Otherwise, Google could be hefty fined.

No, Google doesn't have to pay for Gecko. They have to pay for a competing product to prevent being a monopoly, but that doesn't mean that product has to be Gecko. Again, the have a 2.37 market share. That's pathetic. In what world is that healthy?

 

[Marko :)]

No, Google doesn't have to pay for Gecko. They have to pay for a competing product to prevent being a monopoly, but that doesn't mean that product has to be Gecko. Again, the have a 2.37 market share. That's pathetic. In what world is that healthy?

Officially they pay to be the default search engine in a browser, Mozilla uses this money to fund the development of Firefox. BUT in reality Google pays Mozilla to maintain competitor to Chromium under of excuse being default search engine. Because, if you look at the latest worldwide StatCounter stats, if you combine all Chromium browser marketshare, Google's Chromium has more than 80% marketshare globally. This pretty much makes them a monopoly.
This is why court said Google will might have to sell Chromium; they became player and a referee in the field which isn't fair.

We already saw this multiple times before, companies paying other companies in order to create competition in the field. Remember when Microsoft was literally paying Apple and when Internet Explorer became default web browser on Mac? Yeah, this wasn't done because Microsoft has a big heart.