Firefox
The latest news and developments on Firefox and Mozilla, a global non-profit that strives to promote openness, innovation and opportunity on the web.
You can subscribe to this community from any Kbin or Lemmy instance:
Related
- Firefox Customs: [email protected]
- Thunderbird: [email protected]
Rules
While we are not an official Mozilla community, we have adopted the Mozilla Community Participation Guidelines as far as it can be applied to a bin.
Rules
-
Always be civil and respectful
Don't be toxic, hostile, or a troll, especially towards Mozilla employees. This includes gratuitous use of profanity. -
Don't be a bigot
No form of bigotry will be tolerated. -
Don't post security compromising suggestions
If you do, include an obvious and clear warning. -
Don't post conspiracy theories
Especially ones about nefarious intentions or funding. If you're concerned: Ask. Please don’t fuel conspiracy thinking here. Don’t try to spread FUD, especially against reliable privacy-enhancing software. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Show credible sources. -
Don't accuse others of shilling
Send honest concerns to the moderators and/or admins, and we will investigate. -
Do not remove your help posts after they receive replies
Half the point of asking questions in a public sub is so that everyone can benefit from the answers—which is impossible if you go deleting everything behind yourself once you've gotten yours.
view the rest of the comments
Legalese is always written broadly. As with absolutely everything that touches on IP the ones that yell the loudest are the ones that understand the subject the least.
The search bar doesn't say that will happen, so what legal right does the makers of Firefox have to suddenly send what you type there to some other third party service? You know, that "input information through Firefox".
That's what the license covers. You giving them that right. You don't need to agree with this, but that's how it's done - legally.
If we take the most charitable view of Mozilla possible, as you clearly do, then it can be argued that the license terms are very strictly aimed at allowing Firefox to do the things that a web browser does. If we like, we can then follow that up with a separate discussion: because it is so normal for license terms that sign away your private data to be extremely permissive in favor of the entity receiving the license, does that mean that it's good and/or OK?
Next problem: Mozilla explicitly does not need a license to allow software running on my computer to do anything at all. At no point in the exchange is it necessary for the Mozilla Corporation to obtain a license to my data, because the Firefox browser is not the Mozilla Corporation. Put simply, the Mozilla Corporation is not running on my PC. Which leads me to:
You've made a category mistake here. The makers of Firefox are not sending anything anywhere. Firefox is. My address bar searches do not need to go via the Mozilla Corporation to get to their destination. This license agreement certainly opens up the possibility that they will go via Mozilla, since the new terms explicitly grant them that license, but that is strictly unnecessary for a web browser to function.
Nah, I don't take a charitable view. I did work as a software engineer and open source advocate at Sony for many years and was involved in lots of discussions with the Legal department around open source licensing. I simply know a bit how this works from their point of view which is quite different from that of "us".
I think you're making the mistake of believing your viewpoint to be the only correct one.
Ditto.