Dear blackbird71
I just add what I told about Chromium licences in Firefox in 3rd post of this topic:

Dear blackbird71:
I don't know why I have a memory about Chromium license in Firefox.

Unfortunately, a part of your basic premise is wrong, and it weakens your argument. Firefox is not built upon chromium

In Firefox address bar type "about:license", then press enter.
Press "Ctrl+F" to find "Chromium License". Click on it, then you can see this:

Chromium License

This license applies to parts of the code in:

browser/extensions/mortar/host/common/opengles2-utils.jsm
editor/libeditor/EditorEventListener.cpp
security/sandbox/
widget/cocoa/GfxInfo.mm

and also some files in these directories:

browser/extensions/mortar/ppapi/
dom/media/webspeech/recognition/
dom/plugins/
gfx/ots/
gfx/ycbcr/
ipc/chromium/
media/openmax_dl/
toolkit/components/downloads/chromium/
toolkit/components/url-classifier/chromium/
tools/profiler/

Copyright (c) 2006-2016 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.

Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are
met:

• Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
  notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
• Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above
  copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer
  in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the
  distribution.
• Neither the name of Google Inc. nor the names of its
  contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from
  this software without specific prior written permission.

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS
"AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT
LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR
A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT
OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL,
SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT
LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE,
DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY
THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT
(INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE
OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

This discussion is about four years late.

I agree with you but I think it is better than a destiny like Mosaic web browser for Opera.

I totally agree with This:

If the universe of web browsers was based on a paid product model, things might be different. A company could perhaps offer a superior product at a higher price to cover higher development costs and hope to woo the market toward it

As far as I remember Opera 7 was not free and it contained ads in header. In that time there were many other paid web browsers too. Although today almost all famous web browsers are totally free, it is undeniable that a superior web browser can find it share in global market even it will not be free. On the other hand, there are many individuals that are ready to donate a good project that fixes current browsing problems.

And what makes you think this way?

Because someday Opera was one of the web browsers that developed independently and although it had not considerable conflict with many websites, many web developers checked their website compatibility with it. In that days, Opera was an independent developed web browsers that was always a candidate in speed checking test, etc.

In its latest years, Opera Presto was running behind Chrome and other browsers simply because the developers couldn't add all the new resources quickly enough.
This made Opera to take a long time to start supporting or even support at all features that other browsers already supported.

It is not really a bad thing if it help to develop a superior product. For example, many of Android features were like a dream for iOS users, but no one can deny that iOS is a more optimum OS since it can handle many tasks more efficiently even with less powerful hardware in comparison with it's android opponents.
It is undeniable that google is a pioneer in many new technologies, but in my opinion google is not good enough in software development because it is a company which is getting bigger and bigger and have not enough time to concentrate to optimizing it's software products.

Dear blackbird71:
I don't know why I have a memory about Chromium license in Firefox. I checked what you said and it seems you're right. So I should thank for your correction. However, it do not change the Chromium problems that makes Opera a cheap release Google Chrome while Opera was one of the web-browsing technology leader before it.:(

Since Opera was a brave and innovative company which could lead the technology, surrendering to google chrome not only dose NOT help it to survive, but also make users vulnerable just like IE ages, when the web browser of almost all users was the same and it provided the best opportunity for hackers because It is undeniable that diversity in web-browsers cause many problems for hackers to develop a general malware.

Hello Dear Opera Staff
This is not a support request, This is a SOS massage for saving what remains in Opera kingdom! I hope you read it well and stop the continue the mistake of current development Opera:

Long ago, when almost 90% of internet users used MS Internet Explorer I meet Opera. In fact, I used to be an Opera user since Opera 7. Although Opera had some mistakes and there was some really awful releases like 8.x and 10.x, Opera was so good that I never think about using an alternative and I became it's real fan. In those times, Opera was like a miracle to me. It was the most innovative we browser which used the minimum system resources and provided the fastest speed. I think the main reason for this success for Opera was the "Original Development of an Independent and Innovative web browser".
After extension of Google Chrome, many web-browser developers decided to use Google Chromium as the core of it's software. Even Mozilla Firefox which sometime was the biggest opponent of Opera did this mistake. Soon I found unfortunately Opera did this mistake too. Although it is undeniable that Google Chrome now is the most popular and one of the most powerful web-browsers, it is undeniable it is marked by bad weak points which never observed in old versions of Opera. For example Google Chrome uses memory (RAM) like hell and this problem ports to new versions of Opera. Although Mozilla understand about this mistake and start to develop an original web-browser by fixing Chromium weak points, Chromium based Opera versions in fact are ONLY CHEAP GOOGLE CHROME REDISTRIBUTION which original Google Chrome browser even work more efficient. For example, although the RAM usage problem is almost fixed in Mozilla Firefox while Opera process in Windows task manager is just like the Google Chrome: Each page has a separate process which fools OS that the browser not use a lot of memory, but the some of these separated processes shows the web-browser eats all system resources like hell.
The other problem is this mistake make users vulnerable just like IE ages, when the web browser of almost all users was the same it it provided the best opportunity for hackers, because It is undeniable that diversity in web-browsers is a bad problems for hackers to develop a general malware.

I hope Opera developers stop to continue the mistake releasing a cheap copy of Google Chrome and continue the original Opera policies which was based in a foundation of innovation, creativity and independent development of an original and really lovely product.

Thanks for your time