[fanso99]

They literally say in the first sentence that they will run a public instance on Mozilla.Social. This means they will own that instance.

You could argue that no one owns anything exclusively in today's federalized world but that is not true in practical terms. They will own the identities/social graphs/content created locally. "Own" meaning they have total control over that instance and can, for example, enforce Mozilla-friendly policies, remove content, ban users (without the ability to export one's identity and social graph).

[culi]

But Mastodon is specifically built against that. Users can freely migrate their accounts and all posts are still accessible on other instances (up to a point). The whole point of Mastodon is that users and their content have "exit".

If Mozilla does some weird shit with their instance, people can just... use a different instance. That's kinda the point. And Mozilla's instance will surely take the Mastodon Server Covenant which, among other things, requires users be notified at least 3 months ahead of time before a server gets shut down

[fanso99]

You are misunderstanding federalization. People can migrate their account and social graph to a different instance _only_ if the current instance allows them to do that. If you are banned from Mozilla.social - you can't migrate. The instance owns you.