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

91–100 of 1001 posts

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

#91

Post by aucisson_masque »

firefox is an open source software, i know it's great to bash it with the many questionable decisions they take but at the end it's still the least worst web browser and no one is entitled to having a free, ads free and privacy respecting web browser.

the author shows that mozilla royalty-free, worldwide license TOS change is now similar to what google always had with chrome.

To me as long as i understand the business model of mozilla, which is quite precarious but still, and it doesn't have some funny connections going in and out, i'm fine with their TOS change.

It's not the best but what you gonna do anyway ? chrome is chrome, 99% of the alternative are still running google chrome under the hood which give google insane leverage. Safari is at the mercy of apple dictatorship on the extension support. and that's all.

maybe once google is forbidden to give money to mozilla to choose the default search engine we will see real change in web browser choice, for instance it could fasten the agonizing mozilla death and prompt privacy or even just power user (as people who want to be able to block ads everywhere, not only where google mv3 allows it) to pay to develop, maintain and ultimately use a web browser.

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

#92

Post by noirscape »

zefalt wrote: post #81
noirscape wrote: post #63

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.…

Floorp may be what you're looking for. Pretty similar to native Firefox. https://floorp.app/

Oh interesting, I'll check it out.

Searching around a bit, this fork does seem to meet the criteria I was looking for (plus a few hidden ones like project age; it's a couple years old and still being updated, which means the dev is willing to put the work in as opposed to abandoning it when they get bored). The blocker on widevine being Googles fault (while still supporting L3 out of the box) rather than deliberate "we're not even going to try" is much more acceptable than the Librewolf one.

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

#95

Post by GrantMoyer »

BlackFly wrote: post #87

Remember, "Poor writing, not specialized concepts, drives processing difficulty in legal language."* You see that here. Mozilla chose to use legalese and not plain language, despite there being a movement afoot to try to push (and in some cases legally require) for plain language in legal documents. This one isn't so bad, since they mostly avoid passive voice and don't needlessly capitalize much. Maybe the low freque…

The term itself is bad here. The problem isn't just because it's hard to understand.

> Second clause establishes that when you input that data you give firefox a license to that data which you otherwise own

Firefox doesn't need a license, because it's not a legal entity; it's software acting on behalf of a person (the user).

Mozilla doesn't need a license to all information input through Firefox, because Mozilla doesn't need that data for Firefox to operate.

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

#96

Post by manbart »

rightbyte wrote: post #37
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…

It is really unfortunate. My Firefox install lately added links to what could be considered not so nice sites for grandmas like amazon.com and hotels.com to the start screen. It is quite clear they see it as their program not mine program. I dunno for how long I will stick to using the least worst alternative. To go for custom builds would be giving up on Mozilla. edit: Toned down language

Use LibreWolf. It's just firebox rebuilt and released with better defaults (no suggestions/spying)

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

#97

Post by janc_ »

aucisson_masque wrote: post #83
lenerdenator wrote: post #66

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.

however are the cost of developing a web browser and hosting an internet encyclopedia ran by volunteer comparable ? mozilla use paid labor, engineer who are very expensive. wikipedia it's mostly hosting a html page and a few media. Yet wikipedia has much more user to whom it can show the donation nag when mozilla has a much more limited userbase. i think that mozilla taking google money to put them as default search…

In 2023 the Wikimedia Foundation had 700 paid employees/contractors working for them.

At the end of 2023 Mozilla Corporation had 964 employees and Mozilla Foundation had 118.

So the difference isn’t that large…

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

#98

Post by ewzimm »

aucisson_masque wrote: post #91

firefox is an open source software, i know it's great to bash it with the many questionable decisions they take but at the end it's still the least worst web browser and no one is entitled to having a free, ads free and privacy respecting web browser. the author shows that mozilla royalty-free, worldwide license TOS change is now similar to what google always had with chrome. To me as long as i understand the busines…

I'm genuinely curious about your leverage comment. Lots of people base their browsers on the open source Chromium project. They rely on Google for the source, but they aren't indebted in any way the company. They're essentially just forking the source every time they update.

On the other hand, Mozilla develops their own source code but is almost entirely funded by Google. They are looking for alternative funding, but does receiving all your paychecks from a company give them less leverage over you than freely copying their code? I'm not convinced.

I'm sad to see Firefox take this direction, but they've been going in a bad direction for a long time, and this is a bit too far for me. Deleted it everywhere. Personally, I like Falkon and Vivaldi. Jon von Tetzchner may not release all his source, but he has a great track record over decades of browser development, and that kind of earned trust is something Mozilla has not been fostering lately. He has never demonstrated that Google, Microsoft or anyone else has "insane leverage" over him or his companies and wasn't afraid to walk away from Opera when he didn't like the direction. We need more of that in the browser space.

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

#99

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

b112 wrote: post #64
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.

Or in slightly different terms: If I wasn't using Chrome because of privacy issues, then Firefox losing the privacy advantage means they just ditched the only reason I was still using their product.

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

#100

Post by janc_ »

GrantMoyer wrote: post #75

Firefox's own about:license page (reachable through the about firefox dialog) says the sources are available under a wide variety of open source licenses. Does that mean only Mozilla distributed binaries are governed by the "Firefox Terms of Use"? If I download Firefox through my distro package manager, and the distro infrastructure compiled and distributed it undet the terms of the open source licenses, presumably I…

"Mozilla" & "Firefox" are trademarks which would come with their own legalese I’m sure, and of course there are some services used by Firefox (the Mozilla addons store, the malware blacklists managed by Google IIRC, etc.) that would still require legal statements even for distro or other 3rd party builds.
Post reply on HN