Earlier this week, Google and Mozilla said they had struck a deal to renew their search royalty agreement for another three years.

What the pair declined to add: The search giant will pay just under $300 million per year to be the default choice in Mozilla’s Firefox browser, a huge jump from its previous arrangement, due to competing interest from both Yahoo and Microsoft.

Sources said this total amount — just under $1 billion — was the minimum revenue guarantee for delivering search queries garnered from consumers using Firefox.

Google’s main rival in the bid, sources said, was Microsoft’s Bing search service, which was aggressively trying to hip-check it from the main search spot on the browser.

That’s because the software giant has been spending a lot of money in efforts to grow Bing’s market share in the search market.

Microsoft, of course, also owns the still-dominant Internet Explorer browser, but Google’s Chrome has recently been making major gains over both IE and Mozilla’s Firefox.

Still, Mozilla’s recent negotiations with both companies was about search market share.

Yahoo was also in the mix, even though Microsoft powers its search technology, because a hookup with Firefox was considered a plus in holding on to its declining search market share.

But the deal, which was being pushed hard by Yahoo’s Chief Product Officer Blake Irving and its search head Shashi Seth, was determined to be too costly for Yahoo.

Costly indeed, since the new price is much higher than Google had previously ponied up to Mozilla. In 2010, Google contributed 84 percent of Mozilla’s $123 million in revenue.

A previous version of the partnership had expired at the end of November, and the new talks were done against a backdrop of simmering tension between Google and Mozilla over Chrome.

As Liz Gannes wrote earlier this week:

Since the first search royalty deal was signed in 2008, Google’s own Chrome browser has become a significant competitor. Just last month, Chrome overtook Firefox in global usage for the first time, according to StatCounter. Both browsers — software which is used to navigate the Internet — have about 25 percent market share.

Even with the new default deal with Google, Mozilla still also has partnerships with other search providers, including Bing, Yahoo, Yandex, Amazon and eBay.

Of course, everybody declined to comment on my queries to hand over all the financial deets stat.

But Google’s SVP of Search, Alan Eustace, said in a statement: “Mozilla has been a valuable partner to Google over the years and we look forward to continuing this great partnership in the years to come.”

Great, perhaps, but also much more expensive — so presumably Firefox is worth it.

It’s connected to Amazon’s existing cloud services, so sending mail from applications already hosted on services like EC2 should be easy. Messages will cost 10 cents per thousand, and customers can send up to 2,000 per day for free when the messages originate from within an application already running on EC2 or Elastic Beanstalk, Amazon’s new service for Java developers.

Amazon named two customers already using the service: Eyejot, a video-messaging service, is using it for sending transactional messages. Another is Neustar, a managed service provider that handles domain-name queries, which is using it to ensure smooth delivery of mail related to signup for services.

I recently had a chance to sit down with Ask.com President Doug Leeds, who was particularly high on the company’s efforts in mobile: A new iPhone app that includes the Q&A feature has been downloaded 250,000 times since being released in November.

(It might be premature to say mobile is the future of Ask, considering it has yet to launch apps on other mobile platforms.)

Refocusing Ask around Q&A on both the Web and mobile has already had an impact, even if it’s not fully rolled out. Leeds said 60 percent of Ask queries are in the form of a question now, up from 28 percent last year.

Questions are more monetizable than queries, he attested, because users stay on an Ask.com page rather than clicking to zoom off elsewhere on the Web. Ask has found that users who have their questions answered are 50 percent more likely to click on an ad.

Social search offers Ask.com a way to differentiate itself from the competition. Leeds said the company’s brand has long been a second-choice search engine: A huge percentage of Ask users go to Ask after Google fails to answer their query. That may not sound like something to brag about, but it’s made the company profitable, with consistent traffic as the sixth-largest U.S. site, at 90 million monthly visitors.

Ask doesn’t seem to get a lot of love within the halls of its owner, IAC, so it’s especially important for the company to grow its revenue, if not its traffic. Ask is hiring back 30 of the 150 positions it cut, for a total of 270 employees, said Leeds, who described the layoffs as a removal of satellite offices in order to consolidate operations at its Oakland, Calif., headquarters.

Leeds said that Ask has found social search works especially well on mobile, where, for instance, users can ask a question verbally using the free Ask.com iPhone app with speech recognition, put the phone back in their pocket and wait for a notification saying that a real person has answered the question.

The median answer time for questions posed to the Ask community is approaching five minutes. That’s eons in search time, but the fact that the answer is created within those five minutes matters, said Leeds.

According to a Harris Interactive survey of mobile users sponsored by Ask, 66 percent of respondents said timeliness matters more when they’re not in front of their computer, and 40 percent of smartphone users said they’re more influenced by users’ opinions given within the last 24 hours than those from a month ago.

To be clear, Ask has not completely converted to social. Only 20 percent of visits are currently exposed to community Q&A, and only after users say they want to ask a question or a search has failed to produce results. That’s because Ask doesn’t want to overtax its human question answerers, said Leeds. The majority of Ask user questions are answered through a machine process of extracting information from multiple Web pages (similar to the word definitions, flight status information and real-time weather you’ll get at the top of the search results page if you look for such things on Google or Bing).

To recruit and retain question answerers, Ask has a promotion going where it donates 10 cents per answer to Susan G. Komen for the Cure. “Altruism is the best incentive,” said Leeds. “We don’t want it to be a game; we want it to be useful.” Today, 65 percent of questions asked through community Q&A get accurately routed to an answerer.

Next for Ask is a “nearby” feature of its iPhone app that will launch early next year. The ideal question, said Leeds, would be “Why is there a crowd over there?” Or users could ask about the current state of traffic on roads, crowding in a particular restaurant or whether they should be worried about that smoke they’re smelling in the air. Of course, for this to work well, Ask will need much deeper penetration than 250,000 iPhone users.

As it tries to get social, another limitation for Ask is it doesn’t have much of an existing membership system. Unlike, say, Yahoo, where users are virtually always logged in, Ask has never had a portfolio of products, just search. The company introduced a revamped log-in system in July, but it will have to get many more users to sign in before it can make use of personalization, social connections and network effects to get questions answered. (Hmm…isn’t this what Facebook Connect does?)

The Kayak iPad app

Kayak had revenue of $128 million for net income of $6.2 million through Sept. 30 of this year, up from $86.6 million in revenue and net income of $10.4 million last year. The company significantly increased its marketing spending in that period to $69.1 million from $36.0 million. It has been profitable since 2008.

Kayak is in a bit of a precarious position, since it licenses fare information from ITA Software, which Google has agreed to buy. This is a significant expense; Kayak said in the filing it expects to pay ITA $21 million from the beginning of 2010 to the end of 2012. The company admitted that Google messing with ITA could have a “significant negative effect” on its business.

However, Kayak sought to declare its independence from search, saying very little of its traffic comes from Google and the like. The company contended this is because its users are loyal to its brand. So far this year, 72 percent of Kayak queries came from direct visitors to its site, 15 percent from advertising and only eight percent from users referred by search engines. Kayak had 469 million user queries through Sept. 30, with year-over-year growth of 37 percent.

Kayak also has a contract to show Google ads. The filing reports that 15 percent of Kayak advertising revenue so far this year has come from Google, and eight percent of total revenue (the other source of Kayak revenues is referrals).

Kayak is trying to push itself as a mobile growth story, with four million downloads of its mobile apps so far. The company had joked earlier this month that it was putting out its own phone (riffing on rumors of a “Facebook phone”) called the KPHONE and including features like an “actual igniting signal flare” and automatically dialing of your mom every 15 minutes “because you are a terrible person and seriously you never call.” Obviously that sense of humor doesn’t come through in the S-1.

Essentially, Place Search delivers location-specific search results by organizing content from across the Web around a place, much like Google News aggregates news information around a particular story. And, according to Google, that will make it that much faster and easier for its users to get local information, which they are increasingly looking for. The company says that about 20 percent of searches conducted on Google are local in terms of their overall intent. And it’s so confident of that metric that for queries that have a very heavy and clear local intent, it will automatically switch users into the Place Search mode.

“This is all about contextual discovery,” Marissa Mayer, the company’s VP of geographic and local services, told me this morning. “Think of it this way, as another layer of the Web. One of the first layers of the Web was the content of the Web itself. You looked at a Web page and analyzed its content. That was the purpose of our original search product. Another layer is social–what are the social aspects of the Web? What are the ‘people’ aspects of the Web? Who created this page? Who read it? Did they like it or not? Do I know them?

“Now, we’ve got another fundamental layer: Location. Where was this page authored? Is it about a particular location? Where are the people who this page is relevant to? You start combining these layers–content, social, local–and you get something very powerful.”

Indeed. Particularly in the mobile space, at which Places is very clearly aimed.

Place Search is rolling out now and should be available globally in the next few days.

So how can Twitter generate more search queries than Yahoo (YHOO) and one fifth of Google’s (GOOG) total each month, as the company announced during its Chirp conference today?

Because Twitter’s definition of “search” is different from a regular person’s.

You probably think of a search as something you do when you enter a term into a search box and hit return. But Twitter’s network allows power users on clients like TweetDeck and Seesmic to create a standing search field for a particular term, which then automatically updates itself. Each one of those updates counts as a new search.

And those kinds of searches–made by a minority of Twitter users, with the aid of machines–are what account for most of Twitter’s search volume, Danny Sullivan explains quite well today, following a conversation with Twitter CEO Ev Williams.

As Danny notes, it’s certainly an important technical accomplishment for Twitter to be able to respond to all those queries. But it also illustrates why Twitter needs to and will move its ad platform beyond search queries.

[Image credit: a voir etc]

In lawsuits filed last week, Xerox (XRX) alleges that Google’s AdSense and AdWords and Yahoo’s Search Marketing, Publishing Network and Y!Q Contextual Search software all violate its 2001 patent for a “System for automatically generating queries.”

Xerox further claims that Google Maps, Google Video, YouTube, and Yahoo Shopping infringe on its 2004 patent, “Method and Apparatus for the Integration of Information and Knowledge.”

Xerox is seeking treble damages for the alleged infringements, which it claims are willful. Evidently, it attempted to negotiate licensing deals with the search companies that would have precluded legal action, but was rebuffed.

“We’ve been in dialogue with Google and Yahoo for some time without coming to a resolution,” company spokesperson Bill McKee told Bloomberg. “We believe we have no option but to file suit to properly protect our intellectual property.”

Google (GOOG) and Yahoo (YHOO), for their parts, dispute Xerox’s allegations. “These claims are entirely without merit, and we’ll vigorously defend ourselves against them,” Catherine Lacavera, Google’s senior litigation counsel, said in an emailed statement. A Yahoo representative offered a similar comment: “Yahoo does not believe we infringe and plans to fight this case.”