Mozilla is already revising its new Firefox terms to clarify how it handles user data
-
Is mullvad chromium based?
Nope, Firefox based. It's basically Tor Browser w/o Tor.
-
Wait, you think using Firefox somehow results in them getting money?…
Yes, that's why google is paying millions to be the default.
-
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.
I mean...if they pay for the service of external analization of data in exchange of money, how is that a sale of goods/data?
-
I mean...if they pay for the service of external analization of data in exchange of money, how is that a sale of goods/data?
Ask the lawmakers who wrote the laws with vague language, because according to them, that kind of activity could be considered a sale.
As a more specific example that is more one-sided, but still not technically a "sale," Mozilla has sponsored links on the New Tab page. (they can be disabled of course)
These links are provided by a third-party, relatively privacy protecting ad marketplace. Your browser downloads a list of links from them if you have sponsored links turned on, and no data is actually sent to their service about you. If you click a sponsored link, a request is sent using a protocol that anonymizes your identity, that tells them the link was clicked. That's it, no other data about your identity, browser, etc.
This generates revenue for Mozilla that isn't reliant on Google's subsidies, that doesn't actually sell user data. Under these laws, that would be classified as a sale of user data, since Mozilla technically transferred data from your device (that you clicked the sponsored link) for a benefit. (financial compensation)
However, I doubt anyone would call that feature "selling user data." But, because the law could do so, they have to clarify that in their terms, otherwise someone could sue them saying "you sold my data" when all they did was send a small packet to a server saying that some user, somewhere clicked the sponsored link.
-
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.
I didn't sell your shit, I collected it and shared it to keep myself comercially viable.
-
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.
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"
-
My understanding is that they are all under Mozilla and they're all in danger of the same business decisions.
If that's not the case I'd be more than happy if someone could prove me wrong.
Technically Firefox is operated by the Mozilla Foundation, and thunderbird by its subsidiary, MZLA Technologies Corp. This subsidiary also took over K-9 a while ago iirc.
-
Are you referring to Arc or to Zen?
Zen had its latest release 5 days ago, and arc 4 days ago, so I have no idea what they're talking about.
-
Yes, that's why google is paying millions to be the default.
No, using Google makes Google money. That's why they pay mozilla to be the default.
-
Zen had its latest release 5 days ago, and arc 4 days ago, so I have no idea what they're talking about.
Arc. They are only continuing security updates and necessary maintenance. No more feature work, no more bug fixes.
-
Are you referring to Arc or to Zen?
Arc. The browser company is continuing security updates, but has otherwise stopped all development
-
Is there a way to generate fake data to feed to Firefox with an addon?
Probably easier to go into the settings and untick a box to disable any telemetry.
-
Friendship ended with Firefox,
Librewolf is my new best friend. 
A big problem with such forks (same with packages made by Linux distributors) is that there is a delay between official FF release and the release of the corresponding update of the fork. 99% of the time this doesn't matter much but when there is a severe security issue, the patch needs to be available ASAP.
Past enshittifications of Firefox could be disabled by users. Users who know what to disable don't need such forks then.
I'm not yet clear what Mozilla even intends. Is it just an adjustment of language of things that are already in FF and can be disabled easily? If so, I just keep the following shit disabled and benefit from earlier update releases.
The issue is that Mozilla is actively hiding these settings. There's one (I forgot which one) that you can't find by searching for the title in the FF settings, you have to scroll to it yourself.
-
Is there a way to generate fake data to feed to Firefox with an addon?
maybe with anti-detection browser, there are with free-bee version, dont know if that will help . which basically lets you use proxies as well, and spoofs your fingerprinting. people who made of accts, or advertise on reddit uses these to evade reddit ban(until reddit made it harder to do so currently)
-
Mozilla says that “there are a number of places where we collect and share some data with our partners” so that Firefox can be “commercially viable,” but it adds that it spells those out in its privacy notice and works to strip data of potentially identifying information or share it in aggregate.
Sounds like they've already been selling (or trading) data and this whole debacle is a way to retroactively cover their asses.
google is probably thier number one customer for the data.
-
I'm pretty sure there's something even more perverse happening maybe IP tracking. Maybe phone location tracking. Like when I search for stuff on Google here at home on my phone that stuff appears on my work Google (where I have never actually logged in to Google with any account). It maybe a server side user profile tracking system that we haven't seen before. Instead of tracking a user via IP, you look at a location... Then you look at what people are searching for in that location and you develop a profile for that particular hardware ID.
reddit does the same thing to, to identify ban evaders, except reddit turned it up a notch in doing this. i think only anti-detect browsers can alleviate that
-
Really? I would think most would consider them for what they are: evasive and probably deceptive
vague to be exact, keeping it vague, so its up for interpretation on thier part, and they can use the vagueness as an excuse.
-
No, using Google makes Google money. That's why they pay mozilla to be the default.
And they're not going to pay millions to be the default for a browser that no one uses.
-
I didn't sell your shit, I collected it and shared it to keep myself comercially viable.
Surprise Mechanics
-
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.
Even if Firefox is selling your data, its still 10x better than chrome since they allow uBlock Origin. Fuck chrome and fuck ads
