Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Introducing a terms of use and updated privacy notice for Firefox

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 1001 posts

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

#61

Post by ziddoap »

hellcow wrote: post #53
torben-friis wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not familiar with this change, do you have a link?

The phrase "we don’t sell access to your data" has been removed, gated behind a feature flag connected to this TOS change. Their FAQ was updated to remove the "Does Firefox sell your personal data? Nope. Never have, never will. And we protect you from many of the advertisers who do. Firefox products are designed to protect your privacy. That’s a promise" as well. [0] Combined with their blog posts from the CEO saying…

>Mozilla doesn’t sell data about you, and we don’t buy data about you.

Is still present on https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/faq/

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

#62

Post by sieabahlpark »

Apreche wrote: post #41

There are valid criticisms to make of these ToS. However, if someone is going to stop using Firefox because of these new terms, I would assume that person is already not using any products or services from Apple, Microsoft, Google, Meta, etc. Seems pretty hypocritical otherwise.

[dead]

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

#63

Post by noirscape »

While I think the anger surrounding this is slightly overstated, is there any Desktop fork of Firefox that can essentially just act as a "we prevent Mozilla from doing anything harmful to it's users", while compromising on as little functionality as possible? There's only so many stories of Mozilla deliberately trying to reduce it's browser market share to zero you can put up with before you start looking elsewhere.

I'm thinking something in the same vein as Iceraven, which is a fork of the Android version of Firefox that aims to make the browser more usable for humans instead of servicing the overly restrictive mobile environment/tracking that's bog-standard in most mobile platforms.

I considered Librewolf, but it's willingness to break pages in the name of excessive anti-fingerprinting (the RFP mode breaks a lot of interactables) and ideology (blocking DRM) makes it kind of unacceptable for this purpose. I guess I'm not looking for a privacy fork, just a fork that protects me as a user from anti-features (with widevine in specific not being an anti-feature; I don't like widevine either, but it's kind of necessary for using a browser these days.)

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

#64

Post by b112 »

Apreche wrote: post #41

There are valid criticisms to make of these ToS. However, if someone is going to stop using Firefox because of these new terms, I would assume that person is already not using any products or services from Apple, Microsoft, Google, Meta, etc. Seems pretty hypocritical otherwise.

Those companies are known to be privacy hostile companies. Mozilla/Firefox, not. In fact, Mozilla claims the reverse!

For them to abandon privacy, is a betrayal, it's backstabbing behaviour. Feeling betrayed and wanting nothing to do with said software, as a result, seems normal to me.

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

#65

Post by sejje »

Apreche wrote: post #41

There are valid criticisms to make of these ToS. However, if someone is going to stop using Firefox because of these new terms, I would assume that person is already not using any products or services from Apple, Microsoft, Google, Meta, etc. Seems pretty hypocritical otherwise.

If I'm using a worse product (arguable, I know--depends on use-case) for their virtue signaling, and they quit even pretending...

I might just choose the best browser, then.

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

#66

Post by lenerdenator »

Mozilla needs to learn that when you're an operation running honestly as a non-profit and no one's getting rich (comfortable != rich, btw), there's nothing wrong with the donate nag in a blank new tab.

Wikipedia figured that out long ago. They probably wouldn't be around without that nag box asking for donations.

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

#68

Post by fwn »

unethical_ban wrote: post #47
winkelmann wrote: post #33

An interesting implication of this is that it would point to Firefox being considered a service from Mozilla (hence why they need a license to facilitate your use of the program). If we now look at their "Acceptable Use Policy", we can find this: > You may not use any of Mozilla’s services to [...] Upload, download, transmit, display, or grant access to content that includes graphic depictions of sexuality or violenc…

Firefox has Mozilla facilitated services in it, and the license is saying " we get to use the data we see to help the service". I don't think their AUP considers the browser software a service.

> I don't think their AUP considers the browser software a service.

It is not just about their services! They clarify it by writing: "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." Src.: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/legal/terms/firefox/

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

#69

Post by dvaun »

nh2 wrote: post #48

> You give Mozilla all rights necessary to operate Firefox Wait, now Mozilla operates Firefox for me and I can just lean back while they do the browsing? https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/legal/terms/firefox/ > When you upload or input information through Firefox, you hereby grant us a nonexclusive, royalty-free, worldwide license Really the whole document looks like it was copy-pasted from some SaaS template. Does…

Sounds like a license to train on your data.

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

#70

Post by mozball »

raxxorraxor wrote: post #44
mozball wrote: post #39

Disabled auto-update until this is clarified or alternatives can be found. I for one don't agree to these 'terms of use'. If people are failing to understand Mozilla's legalese, it is Mozilla's fault for making them ambiguous and difficult to understand. They earned 650 million dollars last year. Surely they have the resources for the task.

I would expect half of that is funding developers for their numerous different projects. How naive would that assumption be?

You seem to be in the ballpark : "260 million for 'software development expenses'" : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation#Finances

Still that leaves ~ 400 million dollars for a privacy policy that doesn't read like it came from a sleazy big-tech company.

Post reply on HN