this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2025
425 points (98.9% liked)

Open Source

33883 readers
394 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Thought this was interesting and worth knowing about

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] barnaclebutt@lemmy.world 68 points 2 days ago (23 children)

Who is the moron at Mozilla that thought it would be a good idea to sell user information, and how much does he make a year?

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 69 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (22 children)

$6M, but if you look at the California law that spurred this change, the Privacy Policy that hasn't changed since July 2024, and the revised ToS, this looks mostly like a really, really, really stupid communication error.

It's one of those cases where legally, "sell" includes things that most people wouldn't consider a sale in normal parlance, but Mozilla has to comply with the overbroad legal definition; meanwhile, they don't appear to be fundamentally changing anything about how they're operating.

ETA: I'm still moving to LibreWolf (and maybe Ladybird later on). I'm not a lawyer, and expecting people like me to parse legal definitions of commonly understood words is just asinine.

[–] CandleTiger@programming.dev 4 points 2 days ago (4 children)

legally,"sell" includes things that most people wouldn't consider a sale in normal parlance

Like what, any specific examples?

I have been hearing this repeatedly as a talking point from people defending Firefox but without any specific example of what they do and don’t allow themselves to take and sell, it rings quite hollow.

[–] Astra@lemmy.ml 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/firefox/update-on-terms-of-use/

The reason we’ve stepped away from making blanket claims that “We never sell your data” is because, in some places, the LEGAL definition of “sale of data” is broad and evolving. As an example, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) defines “sale” as the “selling, renting, releasing, disclosing, disseminating, making available, transferring, or otherwise communicating orally, in writing, or by electronic or other means, a consumer’s personal information by [a] business to another business or a third party” in exchange for “monetary” or “other valuable consideration.”

If they give anybody any information for any reason, they open themselves to litigation - however frivolous and unwarranted - because the laws are written to be intentionally vague, to capture a wide variety of scenarios, including those that the law does not explicitly state. There are tons of valuable exchanges that could occur other than strictly data for money, and those exchanges are therefore captured within this new legal definition. To protect themselves from frivolous lawsuits and to remain consistent within the new definitions of these laws, Firefox/Mozilla has changed their Terms of Use. Their uses of data are outlined within their Privacy Policy (linked within the above post).

I suppose this information is only valuable if one trusts Mozilla - one of the most stalwart, dedicated, and outspoken advocates for consumer rights in the digital age.

I'm not saying Mozilla is infallible or above reproach - nobody/nothing is or should be considered so - but if I'm gonna trust any group that says "I'm not fucking you over" it's gonna be the group that has a consistent and very clear history of championing the idea of not fucking people over

[–] Pilferjinx@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Doesn't the new wording also include monetary exchange as well. Wouldn't that mean they could sell your data at anytime even if they are currently not?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (19 replies)
load more comments (19 replies)