AI Summary:

Overview:

  • Mozilla is updating its new Terms of Use for Firefox due to criticism over unclear language about user data.
  • Original terms seemed to give Mozilla broad ownership of user data, causing concern.
  • Updated terms emphasize limited scope of data interaction, stating Mozilla only needs rights necessary to operate Firefox.
  • Mozilla acknowledges confusion and aims to clarify their intent to make Firefox work without owning user content.
  • Company explains they don’t make blanket claims of “never selling data” due to evolving legal definitions and obligations.
  • Mozilla collects and shares some data with partners to keep Firefox commercially viable, but ensures data is anonymized or shared in aggregate.
  • doctortofu@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    That’s good and I’m genuinely glad they’re trying to clarify it, but it proves yet again that their top management is out of touch with reality and their users: somebody (most likely more than one person actually) had to sign off on these changes and the message they sent out - this whole thing could have been avoided if they understood their users better (and/or if they actually cared nore about what users think).

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Google funding allows them to be big and inefficient, which means a lot of tops paid well and thinking themselves fashionable FOSS leader people or something.

      They can live without it. They’ll have to cut most of the organization and return to being an open project developing a web browser.

      That doesn’t sound cool for people not doing useful work. Like me, I’ll get to my shit instead of typing comments.

    • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      “I am doing things that are not selling your data which some people consider to be selling your data”

      Why is he so cryptic? Neil, why don’t you tell me what those things are and let me be the judge?

      • ArchRecord@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Some jurisdictions classify “sale” as broadly as “transfer of data to any other company, for a ‘benefit’ of any kind” Benefit could even be non-monetary in terms of money being transferred for the data, it could be something as broadly as “the browser generally improving using that data and thus being more likely to generate revenue.”

        To avoid frivolous lawsuits, Mozilla had to update their terms to clarify this in order to keep up with newer laws.

        • mle@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I think this is a reasonable explanation.

          But I also believe a large part of the firefox user base does not want any data about them collected by their browser, no matter if it is for commercial purposes or simply analytics / telemetry. Which is why the original statement “we will never sell any of your data” was just good enough for them, and anything mozilla is now saying is basically not good enough, no matter how much they clarify it to mean “not selling in the colloquial sense”

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Louis Rossmann had a good video about this. Basically, California passed a law that changed what “selling your data” means, and it goes way beyond what I consider “selling your data.” There’s an argument here than Mozilla is largely just trying to comply with the law. Whether that’s accurate remains to be seen though.

        • Don_alForno@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Then how about putting that in the language? “We don’t sell your data, except if you’re in California, because they consider x, y and z things we might actually do as selling data.”

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Exactly!

            Hetzner kind of does this, where there’s a separate EULA for US customers that lays out precisely how they’re screwing you in that jurisdiction (e.g. forced arbitration). I’m not happy about that, but I appreciate having a separate, region-specific TOS.

            If some wording only applies in California, state that. Or if it’s due to similar laws elsewhere, then state that. And then detail which features collect data, why, what control you have, and how you can opt-out. Maybe have a separate mini-TOS/EULA for each major component that gets into details.

            But just saying “you give us a license to everything you do on Firefox” may appease their legal counsel, but it doesn’t appease many of their users, especially since they largely appeal to people who care about privacy.

            • monogram@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              At this point I care about ownership of what I do on my browser, Chrome under these guidelines is a better alternative (and that’s a low bar)

                • monogram@feddit.nl
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  It’s not it’s just slightly less bad than Firefox on the perspective of ownership,

                  E.g.: under the new guidelines by Mozilla you’re not allowed to bookmark pornhub

                  This is thanks to Mozilla’s focus on “privacy respecting “ advertisement and ai, go to any open source conference and you’ll see a list of ai talks by them.

                  ——

                  Don’t get me wrong I implore anyone to move to any browser that isn’t; Chrome, Edge, Firefox, Opera

  • Max-P@lemmy.max-p.me
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    They have no business collecting any data in the first place. If I wanted my data collected I’d be using Chrome like everyone else. I’m not choosing to use their buggy ass inferior and slower browser for any of Mozilla’s services, I’m choosing it because I want to support non-Chromium browsers and regain my privacy.

    There’s no point whatsoever to using Firefox if it’s just a worse Chrome.

    • imecth@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Telemetry benefits everyone, knowing which features are getting used, knowing what parts are causing crashes… It lets developers target what to improve and fix instead of going in blind. I get that collecting data can be scary, because so far everyone has been busy selling that data. But there’s a reason why data is so valuable, if it’s properly handled and anonymized it benefits everyone using firefox.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        It lets developers target what to improve and fix instead of going in blind.

        I’m sure they’ll make do

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        No, fuck that and quit bootlicking. Software makers did just fine without telemetry for decades; your supposed justification is nothing but a bullshit lazy excuse.

        • imecth@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Software makers did just fine without telemetry for decades

          They actually did not, almost every software out there is mining your information. Software developers rely on and need data, you can’t guess what people want. Whether it’s from studies, testers, surveys, or telemetry, developers need information about what users like, what they don’t, how they interact with the software… This is what makes data so valuable, and why businesses like Google can exist. Denying open source software telemetry is shooting yourself in the foot.

          • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            . Software developers rely on and need data, you can’t guess what people want.

            Why would I want software developers (particularly web browser) to guess what I want? I will tell them what I want, otherwise they have no business serving it to me.

            If I’m not offering that data, it means I don’t want you to have it. Simple as that.

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Pornhub now remembers what sort of porn you like while browsing incognito. Is this also happening with other browsers? I just don’t wanna have my wife know what kid of bdsm I really like. It keeps things fun that way. Fun, gun, hun, nun, are all too close on the keyboard. Autocorrect can’t fix that.

  • kilonova@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    What’s the alternative for Android? Fuck Chrome I want to move off this shit onto something that actually gives half a shit about me.

    • skankhunt42@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’ve already moved most of my stuff to forks or different software altogether.

      Firefox -> LibreWolf and Waterfox

      Thunderbird -> Evolution

      I’m still trying to decide if I want to move off k9mail on mobile to something else. I probably will but I’m not sure what at this point.