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

821–830 of 1001 posts

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

#821

Post by Piraty »

im3w1l wrote: post #279

I think it's time to bring this to the attention of the EU. The browser race to the bottom may be somewhat acceptable for entertainment, but it is my firm opinion that accessing online government services and banking infrastructure necessary for a modern life shouldn't require me to accept such terms.

I agree but unfortunately very few see this as an issue. For browsers, they kind of soft-lock-out established niche browsers due to heavy use of JS. But this is deepter: more and more banks and public institutions' services imply everyone and their grandma possesses G/A-owned device so they start to require these to access their web services (either through exclusive app access via A/G app ecosystem or by enforcing 2FA (T)OTP which implies using such device for non-devlopers). Some countries force kids to use apple/google-owned devices in class. All of this requires citizens to accept and agree to (possibly changing) TOS and privacy rules (self) of A+G and opting out is hard often times and sometimes impossible. very sad

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

#822

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

HN title: "Mozilla owns "information you input through Firefox"

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 to use that information to help you navigate, experience, and interact with online content as you indicate with your use of Firefox."

This is a license to use, not ownership. If Mozilla owns the information then it does not need a license.

Licenses to use information can be revoked, i.e., terminated.

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

#823

Post by dylan604 »

GuinansEyebrows wrote: post #796
dylan604 wrote: post #790

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until that individual tires of the work, and then stops working on it completely or sells it to someone with less scruples or the project gets hijacked by malicious actor.

Aren’t the latter two more or less what happened to Firefox?

I think it's pretty much what happens to every thing

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

#824

Post by dizhn »

stonemetal12 wrote: post #787
immibis wrote: post #625

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it doesn't. Most businesses finish that sentence with "...for any purpose" not "... to help you navigate the web" It will still be interpreted to mean "...for any purpose" by Mozilla somehow.

How does them selling my data help me navigate the web?

In their holier than thou attitude (shared by some here) you have to pay to do anything. And that's how you pay to use the web with their browser.

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

#825

Post by ragnese »

jltsiren wrote: post #202
Spivak wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's gonna be a weird few years that's for sure. I'll leave it to the historians to decide when the actual tipping point was but the shift in the GOP from being run by Republicans with a few bones thrown to Conservatives every now and again when it's time to drum up votes to the show now being run by Conservatives is going to be the point between two political eras. It's by far not the first time this has happened bu…

I'd say it was the decline and fall of the Soviet block. Without the external pressure to remain competitive, the balance shifted from realism towards ideology.

The U.S. still has competition from Europe and China, no? I'm not convinced that the puritanical fanatics would ever make the rational decision to ease up on their efforts for the sake of the economy. For non-Western examples, see Iran and Afghanistan since the mid 20th century.

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

#826

Post by AlgebraFox »

buyucu wrote: post #732

Mozilla lost its missing a long time ago. The previous CEO was a disaster, and it looks like this one is too.

I think it's safe now to call Mozila's management as criminals. They are using old Mozilla's reputation to profit off people's data.

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

#827

Post by BeFlatXIII »

jcranmer wrote: post #154
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…

> It's against the Terms of Use to use Firefox to... watch porn? Firefox isn't a Mozilla service. The Mozilla services are things like account sync, or the review tool they use.

Imagine using Mozilla Sync to ensure you have the same horse porn on your phone as your laptop out of spite.

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

#828

Post by rdtsc »

ideamotor wrote: post #356
rdtsc wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s about expectations. In very simple language: people expect Microsoft and Google to track the hell out of them. But Mozilla says they are your friend and respects privacy, but then their actions speak the opposite. A betrayal from a friend is harder to handle than a blow from an enemy.

The same effect applies to political parties. The people that care about X focus their complaints to the party that is trying to address issues with X.

Yeah, pretty much. If you look historically, it's always that traitors and betrayers get the most severe punishment. It just wakes up something very basic in humans.

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

#829

Post by rdtsc »

LeChuck wrote: post #352
rdtsc wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s about expectations. In very simple language: people expect Microsoft and Google to track the hell out of them. But Mozilla says they are your friend and respects privacy, but then their actions speak the opposite. A betrayal from a friend is harder to handle than a blow from an enemy.

Mozilla's goals are still much more aligned with my own than any other browser vendor. Not even close. It's not a betrayal, it's a difference of opinion between friends. Edit: If that. I personally think this Terms of Use thing is a storm in a teacup.

> Edit: If that. I personally think this Terms of Use thing is a storm in a teacup.

You may be right, yeah. I don't actually use Firefox, there was something else they did like this before which spooked me off. I was mainly explaining the seemingly odd response people have about this, and why they created a storm.

It's like a friend who says they are your friend, but then don't act like it. As opposed to say a known asshole being an asshole, people don't make a big deal about that any longer.

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

#830

Post by like_any_other »

wongarsu wrote: post #255
chmod775 wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't have to grant Word a license to what I type in it. Yes you do. From Microsoft's Services Agreement [1]: > To the extent necessary to provide the Services to you and others, to protect you and the Services, and to improve Microsoft products and services, you grant to Microsoft a worldwide and royalty-free intellectual property license to use Your Content, for example, to make copies of, retain, transmit, ref…

Which for the record they absolutely need, for example if you write something in word, click the share button, copy the link and publish it in this forum. Microsoft is now publishing whatever you wrote in the document, and their lawyers want to make sure they are allowed to do that. Word versions that predate the share button probably wouldn't need the license grant. But since MS likes to limit the number of differen…

> Which for the record they absolutely need

"Hey, here are my car keys - can you move my car to a different parking space?"

"I cannot - I do not have a royalty-free non-exclusive worldwide perpetual license to access and operate your vehicle."

I realize lawyers have been wildly successful in making a parody of our societies and legal systems, but permission is implied in clicking the "share" button, it does not require obtuse and overreaching legal language to grant.

Post reply on HN