This isn't such an outrageous assumption to make here.
https://github.com/mozilla/bedrock/commit/d459addab846d8144b...
Example: selling market preferences of a town rather than the individual people in it.
But at least with Brave, the initial funding information was made public, so there's already more information available to users in comparison with Mozilla. Mozilla just said: "there are a number of places where we collect and share some data with our partners" - that could mean literally anyone.
You're just spreading FUD unless you have evidence that Brave funnels usage data in secret.
Even if fine in the present, you cannot guarantee me the future of a Thiel-funded, VC-owned firm.
Mozilla, in comparison, is a mature, non-profit with substantial goodwill and operational transparency.
Everything past these details are just noise.
This is common in non-profits for a number of reasons: protects the foundations assets, allows for engaging in commercial operations (Mozilla VPN, Anonym), greater flexibility, etc.
It is not a true for-profit company. All "profit" flows up to the non-profit and the non-profit parent retains complete, absolute control while being tied to the Mozilla mission.