We can’t just get an open standard because corpos will attack it or try to take ownership.
That sounds clever. With a stewardship, a company without the obscene wealth that Google has could actually adopt a project normally out of their reach and influence it for good.
I wish the article went into more detail though.
This helps for context: https://techcrunch.com/2025/08/21/ecosia-has-offered-to-take-stewardship-of-chrome-and-its-not-a-bad-idea/
TLDR; If the lawsuit goes bad, and Google is forced to sell Chrome, it’s a way for them to retain ownership while working with an existing partner to overcome the monopoly ruling.
Still a win win in my book.
That seems like such an odd offer. What does “stewardship” even entail?
Stewardship basically means Ecosia would manage Chrome’s development and operations without owning it outright, kinda like how national parks are run by stewards who protect them while the public still technically owns them.
Seems like it allows a non profit to assume control of a company without having to pay out funds to actually purchase it. They apparently have to reinvest all profits back into the company rather than directly benefiting from it. Though the article does mention under the proposal, some unspecified portion of Chrome profits would go toward ‘climate action’, so there’s some vague positive out of it.
Seems like it would be pretty great honestly, so I can’t imagine it’ll be accepted.
