Lunduke
News • Science & Tech
Mozilla Sued for Discrimination by Former CEO-To-Be
The story this lawsuit tells is a Game of Thrones style power struggle.
June 18, 2024
post photo preview

The Lunduke Journal has obtained the legal documents regarding a new lawsuit which has been filed against Mozilla, makers of Firefox, by a former C-Level executive.

And parts of it read like a Game of Thrones style power struggle within the browser maker.

  • The Mozilla Chief Product Officer was being groomed to take over as the new CEO.
  • That CEO-to-be took some medical leave to treat cancer.
  • In the days (literally) before the CEO-to-be returns from medical leave... the then-serving CEO of Mozilla, Mitchell Baker was fired -- by the Mozilla Board -- abruptly.  No warning.
  • The Mozilla Board of Directors then installed one of their own Board Members, Laura Chambers, as the new CEO.
  • All before that "CEO-to-be" could return to work, from his medical leave, and take over the CEO position.

There is a lot here -- including a tale of discrimination and abuse inside the Mozilla Corporation.

Below are screenshots of large portions of this lawsuit -- the items of particular interest to tell this story -- with each screenshot followed by a brief description and some additional details.  (If you're short on time, just read the descriptions between each screenshot... that will give you a high level overview of this story.)

 

Lawsuit: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

The lawsuit was filed by Steve Teixeria (the former Chief Product Officer of Mozilla), against Mozilla Corporation, in King County, Washington (Seattle), on June 12th, 2024.

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

Teixeira, the new Chief Product Officer (CPO) of Mozilla was brought on board in 2022 and was being groomed to become the new CEO (to replace Mitchell Baker).  This appeared to be the plan from Baker and at least one Mozilla Board Member.

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

As CPO, Teixeira led roughly 75% of the employees of Mozilla, and oversaw the "entire commercial product portfolio".

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

Firefox is reaffirmed to be roughly 90% of Mozilla's revenue.

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

As CPO, Teixeira, was given high performance reviews.

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

Mozilla opened an entire office branch -- in Seattle, WA -- to accommodate Teixeira.  Which would make sense if the plan was to make Teixeira the new CEO.

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

Through September of 2023, the plan remained to transition Teixeira to become the CEO of Mozilla.

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

Teixeira was diagnosed with cancer (ocular melanoma) in October of 2023.  He then took leave (under the Family Medical Leave Act) until February of 2024.  Mitchell Baker remained CEO during that time... until the days before Teixeira returned to work.

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

Mozilla publicly announced their new CEO, Laura Chambers, on February 8th, 2024.

According to this legal filing, that decision was made (by the Mozilla Board), internally, roughly a week prior.  This would be "shortly before Mr. Teixeira" returned from leave on February 1st, 2024.

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

This legal filing appears to say that Mitchell Baker was fired, by the Mozilla Board of Directors -- from her role as the CEO of Mozilla due to her "declining performance".

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

The timing here is interesting.

According to the legal filing, the firing of Mitchell Baker as Mozilla CEO was "so abrupt that they did not conduct a search for a successor".

Meaning: They were in a hurry.  For whatever reason, the Mozilla Board needed to act right then.

And the Mozilla Board -- which included Laura Chambers -- voted to install Laura Chambers as the new CEO.

All of this happened the very moment the person who was being groomed to take over as CEO, Teixeira, returned from his medical leave -- and was set to resume overseeing roughly 75% of Mozilla.

Was this the motivation for moving so quickly to install a new CEO?  To do so prior to Teixeira returning and taking over?

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

The first day back as CPO, Teixeira was instructed to lay off 50 (already selected) employees.  He had questions about who had been selected to be laid off.

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

Teixeira's employees were "explicitly forbidden", by the "Chief People Officer" of Mozilla (Dani Chehak), from briefing and assisting Teixeira as he returned from leave.

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

Teixeira expressed concerns, with Human Resources at Mozilla, that these layoffs would "disproportionately impact" "female leaders" and "persons of color".

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

Teixeira was threatened, by the Chief People Officer (Chehak) to be forcibly placed "back on medical leave" if he "did not execute the layoffs as instructed".

Do what we say, fire these exact people, and don't talk to anyone about it.  Or get out.

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

The new CEO, Laura Chambers, and the Chief People Officer, Chehak, insisted that Teixeira not only announce the layoffs... but falsely take responsibility for the layoff decision-making.

According to this document, Laura Chambers was throwing the person that was being groomed to be the CEO under the bus.

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

Teixeira was "permitted only to speak with the CEO and her direct reports".  His staff -- roughly 75% of Mozilla - was delayed being moved back under his leadership.

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

There was an "outside audit" done of Mozilla's performance in "providing a diverse, equitable, and inclusive workplace culture" by Tiangay Kemokai Law, P.C..

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

According to that outside report, Mozilla's leadership provides an "inadequate response to the needs of a diverse culture" and is "incongruent with [Mozilla's] stated values and goals."

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

Teixeira's former direct reports expressed, to him, "deep concerns" about leadership in his absence.  Specifically regarding "abrupt changes to strategy" and "inappropriate or abusive interactions" from the Senior VP of Strategy Operations (Suba Vasudevan) and the Chief Marketing Officer (Lindsey O'Brien).

This included complaints made to Human Resources regarding the Chief Marketing Officer.

What those complaints were, we do not know.

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

The new CEO, Laura Chambers, hired a consultant to assume Teixeira's core responsibilities after Teixeira returned from medical leave.

Teixeira then received, from the newly installed CEO, his first negative performance review.

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

Teixeira -- once groomed to be the new CEO -- now was being forced to move into a new role. Which he did not want or ask for.

At this time he was able to work full time and did not request time off for medical care.

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

Teixeira's family believed that Mozilla was gathering his publicly available medical information, to be used against him in his employment.  His family then begins to remove public information regarding his medical status.

Teixeira disclosed to the new CEO (Laura Chambers) that liver cancer had been detected.

That information was then shared -- according to other statements within the lawsuit, by Laura Chambers -- with all of her direct reports.  

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

Mozilla then makes it clear they wished to demote Teixeira (from a C-level executive down to a Vice President role).

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

Teixeira declined the demotion (which would come with a 40% pay cut and the job would end, entirely, at the end of the year).

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

Mozilla's CEO, Laura Chambers, then disclosed significant, private details of Teixeira's medical conditions to other Mozilla employees.  Without Teixeira's consent.

Chambers also told other Mozilla employees that Teixeira would be demoted (the demotion that he had just rejected).

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

A key note here: Teixeira had "not requested additional flexibility related to his disability."

On April 25th, Teixeira made a complaint, in writing, that he had been discriminated against because of his cancer.  Two days later, on April 27th, the CEO (Laura Chambers), "retaliated against Mr. Teixeira" by telling him, in a nutshell, to "take the demotion or you're fired."

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

Mozilla, over the next couple days, began panicking -- instructing Teixeira not to discuss anything related to his employment with Mozilla... with anyone.  Even going so far as to draft up a new "non-disparagement and non-disclosure" document with new restrictions.

By the next week Teixeir was placed on "administrative leave".  His direct reports all reassigned to other executives.  His chief of staff fired.

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

Mozilla refused to provide a reason for these actions.

Mozilla then cut off Teixeira's access to all Mozilla systems (including email and messaging) -- and instructed Mozilla employees to "not communicate with Mr. Teixeira."

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

A few weeks later an "investigation" was launched into Teixeira's discrimination allegations.  However Teixeira was never contacted to participate in the investigation.  Which is strange, to say the least.

Normally an "investigation" involves all parties involved.

It would be very interesting to see the full results of that "investigation".

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

Mozilla continued to falsely state that Teixeira was on "medical leave", and provided Teixeira's medical details to other employees without his consent.

Which, if true, means Mozilla is likely going to be anxious to settle this lawsuit out of court.

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

This resulted in multiple Mozilla employees being led to believe that Teixeira "would pass away imminently" -- which, obviously, would be pretty distressing for both the remaining Mozilla employees and Teixeira and his family.

 

Source: Steve Teixeira vs Mozilla Corporation (et al), June 12th, 2024

 

Based on the details of this lawsuit -- should the details all prove accurate -- it certainly doesn't paint Mozilla in a good light.

  • A CEO ousted -- abruptly -- in the moments before a "New CEO-To-Be" returned to work and could take over?
  • The Mozilla Board acting with lightning speed to install one of their own into the CEO position?
  • Silencing.  Scapegoating.  Discrimination.  Abuse.

Raises many, many questions about what has been going on within Mozilla... and how specific individuals rose to power within the organization.

This document, of course, is merely one side of the story.

Should this case move to trial, we would hear Mozilla's side of the story.  That, however, seems unlikely... as these sorts of cases -- especially when they appear this strong -- tend to be settled pre-trial.

The Lunduke Journal has reached out to to both Mozilla and Teixeira for comment.  As this is an ongoing lawsuit -- and Mozilla has a strong track record of silence and secrecy -- no response is expected.

community logo
Join the Lunduke Community
To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today
24
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
4Chan and Kiwi Farms File Lawsuit Against UK

It is both an important legal case... and a brilliant trolling of the British government.

The article:
https://lunduke.substack.com/p/4chan-and-kiwi-farms-file-lawsuit

More from The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.com/

00:21:00
Microsoft Fires "Intifada" Employees

This last week, a group of anti-Jewish Microsoft employees got rowdy. Microsoft fired some of them and sent The Lunduke Journal a statement. Then held a media briefing. Let's watch it together.

More from The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.com/

00:27:39
Video of "Worker Intifada" Occupying Microsoft President's Office

Last week the Microsoft "Worker Intifada" ransacked a farmers market and chanted "Go away, Jews!" Today they got arrested in Microsoft's President's office. We have the video.

The Brad Smith office "occupation" video clips:
https://x.com/LundukeJournal/status/1960502030692229479

More from The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.com/

00:19:50
November 22, 2023
The futility of Ad-Blockers

Ads are filling the entirety of the Web -- websites, podcasts, YouTube videos, etc. -- at an increasing rate. Prices for those ad placements are plummeting. Consumers are desperate to use ad-blockers to make the web palatable. Google (and others) are desperate to break and block ad-blockers. All of which results in... more ads and lower pay for creators.

It's a fascinatingly annoying cycle. And there's only one viable way out of it.

Looking for the Podcast RSS feed or other links? Check here:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4619051/lunduke-journal-link-central-tm

Give the gift of The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4898317/give-the-gift-of-the-lunduke-journal

The futility of Ad-Blockers
November 21, 2023
openSUSE says "No Lunduke allowed!"

Those in power with openSUSE make it clear they will not allow me anywhere near anything related to the openSUSE project. Ever. For any reason.

Well, that settles that, then! Guess I won't be contributing to openSUSE! 🤣

Looking for the Podcast RSS feed or other links?
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4619051/lunduke-journal-link-central-tm

Give the gift of The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4898317/give-the-gift-of-the-lunduke-journal

openSUSE says "No Lunduke allowed!"
September 13, 2023
"Andreas Kling creator of Serenity OS & Ladybird Web Browser" - Lunduke’s Big Tech Show - September 13th, 2023 - Ep 044

This episode is free for all to enjoy and share.

Be sure to subscribe here at Lunduke.Locals.com to get all shows & articles (including interviews with other amazing nerds).

"Andreas Kling creator of Serenity OS & Ladybird Web Browser" - Lunduke’s Big Tech Show - September 13th, 2023 - Ep 044

🌈 💥 I suppose that I would spend my time with "Tropico", or the first two "Fallout" games, or entertain myself with "Day of the Tentacle."

😸 I actually felt a little better, "Doom Scrolling" the post.

post photo preview

Reinstalling OSX on my old PPC Mac Mini. It verifies the install CD whether you like it or not. I can't stand that kind of thing. “Oh now, it's for your own good, you know”. My own good is “not having to sit around for half an hour waiting for verification of a disc that I already know is good and don't actually care if it isn't anyway because it's a 20-year-old OS on a 20-year-old machine and I'm only doing this because I messed up a Linux install and actually want to check that the hard disk will still boot an OS”.

Grr.

19 hours ago
post photo preview
Android to Require Developer ID Checks
Want to publish Android software? You'll need to let Google verify your identity. Plus: Google commits to supporting Sideloading and Third Party App Stores.

Google has announced that they will be requiring all Android Apps — including “sideloaded” apps installed outside of the Google Play Store — to undergo developer identity verification.

Android Developer ID Check

“Starting next year, Android will require all apps to be registered by verified developers in order to be installed by users on certified Android devices,” says Google. “Think of it like an ID check at the airport, which confirms a traveler's identity but is separate from the security screening of their bags; we will be confirming who the developer is, not reviewing the content of their app or where it came from.”

 

These requirements will go into full effect in September of 2026 (one year from now), but only for developers in four countries: Brazil, Indonesia, Singapore, and Thailand.

Countries which, according to Google, suffer from “fraudulent app scams, often from repeat perpetrators”.

The idea seems simple enough: If a developer is known to make Android malware, Google will have the ability to block their software from being installed. Thus preventing the spread of Malware.

We will see how well this system works, in practice, next year.

 

It also remains to be seen when this “Google App Developer Identity Verification” requirement will be enforced in other countries (such as the USA). For the moment, Google is simply saying “2027 and beyond”… so there’s still time left for this policy to be modified.

As part of the process, Google is launching a new “Android Developer Console”, specifically for developers to verify their identity and register their applications.

The Practical Impact

What does this new “ID verification” for Android Devs mean… in the real world?

Once this change is worldwide:

  • A developer must be “verified” before their software can be installed via any mechanism — including Sideloaded Apps, and alternative App Stores (such as F-Droid).

  • Developing and publishing Android software, in an anonymous fashion, will no longer be supported.

Google is also, it appears, committing to continuing to allow “sideloading” and third party App Stores for the foreseeable future.

In other words: If a user wants to sideload software, or use F-Droid, Google will allow that. But Google is going to know the real-world identity of the developer / publisher of any software that gets installed.

The War on Sideloading, Revised

Google and Apple have been at war with the concept of “sideloading” (aka “Installing software the normal way”) for several years now. With both companies adding new features to their systems which allow them to block the ability of users to install “non-approved” software.

 

In that context, this particular announcement from Google is a bit of a double edged sword.

From Google’s announcement:

“To be clear, developers will have the same freedom to distribute their apps directly to users through sideloading or to use any app store they prefer. We believe this is how an open system should work—by preserving choice while enhancing security for everyone.”

On the one hand, requiring ID verification for developers is clearly a big step towards increased control over what software is installable on the systems we own.

On the other hand, Google is making it clear they intend to support sideloading & third party App Stores into the future.

Something they have been hesitant about in the past.

Read full Article
post photo preview
All Lunduke Journal Videos Now Free for Everyone
All Articles. All Audio Podcasts. And, yes, all Videos from The Lunduke Journal. Free. For subscribers and non-subscribers alike. On all publishing platforms.

The Short-Short Version: Articles, Podcasts, and Videos — from The Lunduke Journal — are now, once again, free for absolutely everyone. Subscribers and non-Subscribers alike. On all publishing platforms.

The Slightly Less Short Version

A little over two weeks ago, The Lunduke Journal implemented a change. All of the Articles & Audio Podcasts would remain free for everyone… but the Videos would now be published as subscriber exclusives. Non-subscribers would no longer have access to videos.

This was what is known as a “Huge Mistake Made by a Total Bonehead”.

 

While the motivation for that change was well intentioned (to provide some perks for all of the amazing subscribers who make The Lunduke Journal possible, and maybe encourage some new subscribers in the process)… in practice it was an absolute disaster.

The key problem with making all of the videos “Subscriber Exclusives” was, in hindsight, incredibly obvious:

Many people will subscribe to The Lunduke Journal on one platform… but prefer to watch (or read… or listen) to The Lunduke Journal on a completely different platform.

For example: Someone who subscribes on Locals may watch the videos on YouTube. Another person who subscribes on Substack may watch on Rumble. And so on.

And, by making those videos “Subscriber Only”, it made watching The Lunduke Journal’s videos significantly more difficult for… Subscribers. The very people it was supposed to be a perk for.

Whoopsie Daisy

Well. Shoot. I’m man enough to admit when I’ve made a mistake. And, boy howdy, was that a mistake!

 

Effective immediately, Videos are now officially free for everyone (just like the Articles & Podcasts). On all platforms which The Lunduke Journal publishes to. Because making sure reading, listening to, and watching The Lunduke Journal is convenient for all of you is a top priority.

Over the next day, all of the “Subscriber Exclusive” videos (published over the last 2 weeks) will become free for everyone.

Running The Lunduke Journal is Not Easy

Just as an aside: What we’re doing with The Lunduke Journal is… unique.

Pretty much every Tech Journalist is funded by Big Tech. Money for advertisements. Money for sponsorships. Money for “paid articles” that look like real journalism but are, in fact, just repackaged ads and press releases.

Take away that Big Tech money and 9 out of 10 Tech News outlets would go out of business tomorrow. Which means they all need to keep Big Tech happy. And that shows in their coverage (and their refusal to touch many important news stories).

By choosing to not take a single penny from Big Tech, The Lunduke Journal has the freedom to tell the truth. To follow the Tech News stories wherever they lead (no matter who it makes grumpy).

But it also means that keeping The Lunduke Journal in business is even trickier than it is for all of those Brand X Tech News Outlets (which already have a hard time staying afloat, even with the Big Tech moolah).

What’s amazing… is that we, against all odds, have pulled it off. For several years now, The Lunduke Journal has stayed in business without taking a dime from Big Tech. And that’s all thanks to all of you. Thank you for making this possible.

If you haven’t grabbed a subscription, just a reminder that now is a great time to do that. 50% off through the end of August (which is a few days from now).

Want to support The Lunduke Journal having all videos (and everything else) for free for the world? That would be a great way to do it.

Once again. Seriously.

Thank you.

-Lunduke

Read full Article
post photo preview
Omarchy 2.0 - The Arch-Based, Hyprland, Non-Woke Distro
The 2.0 release of the unabashedly nerdy, developer focused, & DEI-free Linux distribution is here. And people are flocking to it.

Omarchy, an Arch-based Linux distribution which self-describes as “An opinionated Arch + Hyprland Setup”, has just published their 2.0 release.

 

Omarchy was started by David Heinemeier Hansson (DHH), the creator of Ruby on Rails, as a command-line and developer focused (and unabashedly nerdy) configuration of Arch Linux.

In the short time since it began (back in June), Omarchy has captured a massive amount of interest and has grown to become a full-fledged distribution in its own right.

Omarchy 2.0 boasts a new ISO installation method, AUR-free installation, a Chrome micro-fork with live theme switching, a Starship prompt, a new icon, and 400 other changes (from 45 contributors).

 

According to DHH, the Omarchy Discord now has over 6,000 members with the website having received over 100,000 unique visitors in the last month.

Not too shabby for a Linux distribution that is only 2 months old.

Speaking of Discord, if the Omarchy installation fails, it displays a QR code with an invite link to the Omarchy support channel. I thought that was a rather nice touch.

 

Worth noting that Omarchy — and the Hyprland window manager, which Omarchy uses by default — both were added to “Lunduke’s Non-Woke Software List” this month.

 

Omarchy is yet another Open Source project which has steered clear of Woke & DEI politics… and has seen tremendous success and adoption. We have seen that same scenario play out repeatedly now, with projects like OpenMandriva, XLibre, Hyprland, & Brave.

Avoid DEI. Experience a flood of users, contributors, and excitement.

A pattern is emerging. Hopefully more projects learn this important lesson.


The Lunduke Journal is the last bastion of truly independent Tech Journalism. Ad Free, Big Tech Free, Non-Woke, & Audience Supported.

Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals