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

881–890 of 1001 posts

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

#881

Post by apalerwuss »

meragrin_ wrote: post #788
bolognafairy wrote: post #559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. We are talking about legality. Quote the whole bloody thing. If you don’t get to say “I picked out the bit I like” in court, then you don’t get to do it here. If you’re so right, then it’s not worth taking out in the first place.

Quoting the whole bloody thing is meaningless when the added bit adds nothing to the context. Nothing about the "added context" says they won't sell the data. If anything it just improves the case that they are going to sell the data.

None of this matters -- quote the whole sentence if that part of the sentence adds any kind of modifier or caveat to what came before -- which this did. Again, not saying it makes a material difference, but I just find it weird when people decide to "quote" things and leave out the whole thing. It tells me that they don't mean well.

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

#882

Post by krick »

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…

Honestly, I am a bit surprised dang didn't change the title, given all the outrage and huge number of upvotes. Regardless of whether your analysis is missing anything, it just says what license doesn't say, and in that sense, yes, it's a complete lie, and people who were completely ok with what's going on yesterday are completely outraged and are massively switching to brave/chromium(lol)/ladybird again.

And, honestly, at this point this feels seriously misguided. However many bad things I can say about Mozilla, what really has changed on 25 Feb? Nothing much, really. The removed claim that they don't sell user data (linked in another comment) might be actually the bigger news here. But that also is much less important than what data they can actually gather (compared to brave/chromium/ladybird/whatever). If you can still disable tracking as before, well, ok.

Obviously, I don't think it's ideal in any case, and I'd rather like to have the same relationships with my browser as I have with Vim. But that is besides the point, the point being that news aren't really news (at least, definitely not the same news as 90% of posters in the topic are perceiving/discussing).

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

#883

Post by neilv »

arjunaaqa wrote: post #606
neilv wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bet there are still some software developers there who genuinely care about the mission. Other than that, I've had to backspace and abort comments so much tonight, because I was angry beyond decorum, at the repeated betrayals.

Cool down friend. There will always be great people building alternatives.

We need a trustworthy Web browser. There isn't one. And such a massive complexity moat has been created with de facto standards, and also made a moving target, that some nice programmer's temporary hobby project isn't a viable solution.

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

#884

Post by dang »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #822

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. I…

Good catch—thanks! I've put that more accurate quote in the title above (or rather, a shortened version that fits HN's 80 char limit).

Edit: merging into https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43185909

Earlier thread (in this case) was https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43200065, which had that title.

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

#885

Post by dang »

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…

Thanks—we've updated the title to mention licenses now. I think probably we'll end up merging all these threads; not sure yet.

Edit: merging into https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43185909.

Earlier thread (in this case) was https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43200065, which had that title.

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

#886

Post by dang »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #248

Title is inaccurate. Mozilla get a nonexclusive license. That is different from ownership. The license grant in these terms does not specify the license is irrevocable. The licensor, i.e., the Firefox user, reserves the right to revoke.

Thanks—we've updated the title to mention licenses now. I think probably we'll end up merging all these threads; not sure yet.

Edit: merging into https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43185909.

Earlier thread (in this case) was https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43200065, which had that title.

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

#887

Post by dang »

LeChuck wrote: post #330

It's fascinating how any Firefox thread here inevitably devolves into accusations that Mozilla has abandoned users and a push to switch to alternatives, despite Mozilla working in the interest of users to a infinitely greater degree than any other major browser vendor.

You're right, and at the same time those two things go together if you think about it. The browser that does more (or cares at all) is held to the higher standard and inevitably found wanting.

(I'm not taking sides in the debate about it, I just find internet psychology fascinating)

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

#888

Post by jeroenhd »

_Algernon_ wrote: post #344

>UPDATE: We’ve seen a little confusion about the language regarding licenses, so we want to clear that up. We need a license to allow us to make some of the basic functionality of Firefox possible. Without it, we couldn’t use information typed into Firefox, for example. It does NOT give us ownership of your data or a right to use it for anything other than what is described in the Privacy Notice. From their blog post…

They're covering their asses for something. That could also just mean that the old license/terms/privacy policy doesn't actually cover the data processing they're already doing (i.e. the opt-out telemetry, the account sync mechanism, etc.). If they publicly admit that their previous agreements didn't provide enough legal cover to allow their basic data processing, the class action lawsuit vultures would be all over them.

Something something malice something incompetence.

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

#889

Post by jeroenhd »

p0w3n3d wrote: post #393
UweSchmidt wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My mental model of a browser is the same as of any tool, as a hammer, purely defined by its technical capabilities to do a job, like to display a website and offer basic functionality like for saving a bookmark. The very idea of an entity called "we", an anonymous and ever-changing cast of people managing "responsible defaults" and "simple tools to manage your data" and communicating it on their terms, making me try…

I consider a browser as similar as a complicated curl with GUI. Therefore: - when I see that browser does not allow playing video in the background (youtube on mobile phones) - when my browser disallows me blocking certain things - when my browser prevents me from taking screenshot of things I can see on it ... it really angers me, as I feel betrayed. Of course, nowadays, web applications tend to get complicated and…

> - when I see that browser does not allow playing video in the background (youtube on mobile phones)

The browser supports it just fine. Youtube itself disables that functionality (to try to push you to Youtube Premium). You can install an addon from the recommended addons to fix that.

> - when my browser disallows me blocking certain things

The only thing I remember Firefox blocking from meddling with is pages like mozilla.org and their addon store. Which, for security reasons, makes a lot of sense.

> - when my browser prevents me from taking screenshot of things I can see on it

That's a setting, though, isn't it? Unless you mean the optional DRM support Firefox has. You can disable that permanently if you don't like it, though you won't be able to visit many DRM-based websites. I've configured my browser to request permission before playing DRM based content and you'll be surprised how often the permission prompt pops up on websites that host normal (non-TV) media.

Post reply on HN