Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox • Hacker News Board

Re: Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox

#211

Post by mmooss » Fri, Feb 28, 2025, 2:26 AM UTC

Mistletoe wrote: post #155

userbinator wrote: post #151

The other WTF is here: Your use of Firefox must follow Mozilla’s Acceptable Use Policy, and you agree that you will not use Firefox to infringe anyone’s rights or violate any applicable laws or regulations. Acceptable Use Policy links to https://www.mozilla.org/about/legal/acceptable-use/ which says "You may not use any of Mozilla’s services to[...]Upload, download, transmit, display, or grant access to content that…

We are under an attack by Puritanism that is quite astounding actually. And no one is doing anything. Everyone just keeps bending the knee. https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/1hqqpbt/newest_ver... Some of the things that are happening are just from the threat of “something bad might come down from the new administration”. It’s so ridiculous.

IIRC, terms like that have been in agreements for many years. It's boilerplate, almost.

Re: Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox

#212

Post by kevingadd » Fri, Feb 28, 2025, 2:29 AM UTC

shmel wrote: post #186

kevingadd wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox-the-browser isn't a service, it's a product. Their services are things like profile syncing. It makes sense to me that they wouldn't want content on their servers that they could get in legal trouble for hosting.

Legal trouble for sexuality and violence? I am sorry, in what jurisdiction are their servers? Iran or North Korea?

Porn bans get proposed in the US on a regular basis.

Re: Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox

#213

Post by nerdile » Fri, Feb 28, 2025, 2:33 AM UTC

chmod775 wrote: post #170

Title is a complete lie/misleading. They get a license, not ownership. Let's dissect what it actually says, and we do it backwards, because given the discussion around this subject it seems like people space out or have their mind clouded by outrage before they get to the end of the sentence: > help you [do things] as you indicate with your use of Firefox. So this already only covers things that you indicate you want…

I don't have to grant Word a license to what I type in it. This is a highly unusual clause that other software doesn't have.

When software has to "phone home" to deliver the functionality you requested, then two things happen: One, a number of privacy regulations kick in, and they need to get you to agree to send your data to them. Two, they now get to move your data out of your control. I mean, you trust them today, so here's hoping they don't ever get hacked or hire someone untrustworthy?

It's sad when even to use the basic features of a web browser, you need to agree to send them your data. It's not fundamentally necessary to send your data to Mozilla or their partners in order to load and render a website. It's a dark pattern to obtain consent to collect your data "when it's necessary", and then rewrite your app to make it necessary.

Re: Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox

#214

Post by simpaticoder » Fri, Feb 28, 2025, 2:33 AM UTC

chmod775 wrote: post #198

simpaticoder wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Let's dissect what it actually says I don't believe that dissection is a good way to understand the implications of this clause. >When you upload or input information through Firefox, you hereby grant us a nonexclusive, royalty-free, worldwide license to use that information to help you navigate, experience, and interact with online content as you indicate with your use of Firefox. Rather than go over this word-by-w…

> First, you used Firefox and therefore enabled the clause. I believe your confusion stems from a misreading of "as you indicate with your use of Firefox". You're reading it like "by using Firefox, you indicate". Contemplate the difference between "The car is allowed to move as you indicate with the controls." versus "By using the controls, you indicate the car is allowed to move." The former explicitly only allows t…

You have now edited your comment at least 3 times. I find it hard to take this argument seriously, and indeed struggle to understand how it isn't trolling. At best this language is ambiguous; at worst it is misleading. It certainly ignores the core point of my comment, which is to construct hypothetical actions by Mozilla that would NOT be permitted by the clause. I strongly feel that your purpose in defending Mozilla here would be better served by providing those examples.

Re: Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox

#215

Post by ndiddy » Fri, Feb 28, 2025, 2:36 AM UTC

chmod775 wrote: post #170

Title is a complete lie/misleading. They get a license, not ownership. Let's dissect what it actually says, and we do it backwards, because given the discussion around this subject it seems like people space out or have their mind clouded by outrage before they get to the end of the sentence: > help you [do things] as you indicate with your use of Firefox. So this already only covers things that you indicate you want…

Given that Mozilla updated their site a couple days ago to remove any wording along the lines of "Firefox will never sell your data to advertisers" when a flag associated with the new Firefox terms of use is enabled (see https://github.com/mozilla/bedrock/commit/d459addab846d8144b...), I'm not so sure that this is a CYA about standard web browser usage.

Re: Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox

#216

Post by chmod775 » Fri, Feb 28, 2025, 2:37 AM UTC

simpaticoder wrote: post #214

chmod775 wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First, you used Firefox and therefore enabled the clause. I believe your confusion stems from a misreading of "as you indicate with your use of Firefox". You're reading it like "by using Firefox, you indicate". Contemplate the difference between "The car is allowed to move as you indicate with the controls." versus "By using the controls, you indicate the car is allowed to move." The former explicitly only allows t…

You have now edited your comment at least 3 times. I find it hard to take this argument seriously, and indeed struggle to understand how it isn't trolling. At best this language is ambiguous; at worst it is misleading. It certainly ignores the core point of my comment, which is to construct hypothetical actions by Mozilla that would NOT be permitted by the clause. I strongly feel that your purpose in defending Mozill…

> You have now edited your comment at least 3 times.

Yes. I reworked the example a few times. I think the third rewrite made it pretty clear.

> It certainly ignores the core point of my comment, which is to construct hypothetical actions by Mozilla that would NOT be permitted by the clause.

The hypothetical action you gave is not permitted, because the user would not have indicated they wanted Mozilla to do that. Firefox/Mozilla is only allowed to use your data as indicated by you.

Re: Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox

#217

Post by wongarsu » Fri, Feb 28, 2025, 2:38 AM UTC

lopatin wrote: post #183

chmod775 wrote: post #170

Title is a complete lie/misleading. They get a license, not ownership. Let's dissect what it actually says, and we do it backwards, because given the discussion around this subject it seems like people space out or have their mind clouded by outrage before they get to the end of the sentence: > help you [do things] as you indicate with your use of Firefox. So this already only covers things that you indicate you want…

I still don't get it. Is Mozilla phoning home the fact that I pressed the button?

That'd be a matter for the privacy policy. The section in question is whether they can then go ahead and publish a list of all the buttons you pressed. Which according to this license grant they can, but only if it "helps you navigate, experience, [or] interact with online content as you indicate with your use of Firefox". What does that mean? I have no clue. It's a really strange restriction and I can't decide if that's wide open or so narrow that it is basically never met

Re: Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox

#218

Post by theturtletalks » Fri, Feb 28, 2025, 2:40 AM UTC

ndiddy wrote: post #215

chmod775 wrote: post #170

Title is a complete lie/misleading. They get a license, not ownership. Let's dissect what it actually says, and we do it backwards, because given the discussion around this subject it seems like people space out or have their mind clouded by outrage before they get to the end of the sentence: > help you [do things] as you indicate with your use of Firefox. So this already only covers things that you indicate you want…

Given that Mozilla updated their site a couple days ago to remove any wording along the lines of "Firefox will never sell your data to advertisers" when a flag associated with the new Firefox terms of use is enabled (see https://github.com/mozilla/bedrock/commit/d459addab846d8144b... ), I'm not so sure that this is a CYA about standard web browser usage.

> {% if switch('firefox-tou') %}

      Firefox is independent and a part of the not-for-profit Mozilla, which fights for your online rights, keeps corporate powers in check and makes the internet accessible to everyone, everywhere. We believe the internet is for people, not profit. You’re in control over who sees your search and browsing history. All that and exceptional performance too.

    {% else %}

      Firefox is independent and a part of the not-for-profit Mozilla, which fights for your online rights, keeps corporate powers in check and makes the internet accessible to everyone, everywhere. We believe the internet is for people, not profit. Unlike other companies, we don’t sell access to your data. You’re in control over who sees your search and browsing history. All that and exceptional performance too.

    {% endif %}

The proof is in the code, great work.

Re: Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox

#219

Post by chippiewill » Fri, Feb 28, 2025, 2:41 AM UTC

kevingadd wrote: post #176

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not unprecedented to have an open source license with revocation or termination clauses, either. I recall seeing ones that basically say "If you file a patent suit around this open software, your rights to use it are gone". Trying to take back the license based on use of the software, however, would make it not "open source", since that would be use restriction.

Mozilla has had their own dedicated license - the Mozilla Public License - for as long as I remember. My understanding is that FF and Thunderbird's source code are both still under this license. https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/MPL/ Whether or not the MPL counts as 'open source' is a question for the people who steward that term, I guess. But they've not been using a Standard Open Source License for a while.

It's OSI approved which is about as official as 'open source' gets: https://opensource.org/license/mpl-2-0

Re: Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox

#220

Post by janalsncm » Fri, Feb 28, 2025, 2:41 AM UTC

chmod775 wrote: post #198

simpaticoder wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Let's dissect what it actually says I don't believe that dissection is a good way to understand the implications of this clause. >When you upload or input information through Firefox, you hereby grant us a nonexclusive, royalty-free, worldwide license to use that information to help you navigate, experience, and interact with online content as you indicate with your use of Firefox. Rather than go over this word-by-w…

> First, you used Firefox and therefore enabled the clause. I believe your confusion stems from a misreading of "as you indicate with your use of Firefox". You're reading it like "by using Firefox, you indicate". Contemplate the difference between "The car is allowed to move as you indicate with the controls." versus "By using the controls, you indicate the car is allowed to move." The former explicitly only allows t…

Ok, so you read it to say that at some later point they will ask, and that point the language will matter.

What was the purpose of mentioning it now? And why write in such an ambiguous way that it could be interpreted otherwise? And that still doesn’t give me confidence about what they will do at a later time. I don’t like it at all, these are used car dealership tactics.