this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2025
87 points (83.7% liked)

Firefox

4574 readers
296 users here now

A community for discussion about Mozilla Firefox.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

You can find all of these videos as written articles, plus some extra content, at https://thelibre.news/ You can the channel grow by donating to the following platforms: Paypal: https://paypal.me/ni...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 hours ago (14 children)

I don't think that's the case. This article says that an overly generalised definition of "sale" was proposed in California law, but that language was removed before the law came into effect.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 hours ago (9 children)

Maybe I glanced over it too much, but as far as I know the problem is this exact line which is still in the law:

by the business to another business or a third party for monetary or other valuable consideration

Context:

"... 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 the business to another business or a third party for monetary or other valuable consideration."

What is this "or other valuable consideration"? Could be anything which makes it very very very very broad

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 hours ago (8 children)

Firstly, "consideration" in this context means payment. It's standard contract law terminology. What that statement means is that Mozilla can't give data to a 3rd party in exchange for a payment (money or otherwise) from the 3rd party.

Mozilla should still be able to "share" data with no value exchange, or even pay a 3rd party to process the data in some way. In the latter case, Mozilla would be giving the data freely, on top of a transaction where Mozilla provides consideration in exchange for the 3rd party's service.

The only way, as I see it, that "valuable considerstion" towards Mozilla would occur is if the 3rd party were to give a discount on their service in exchange for the right to exploit the data. Or if Mozilla otherwise straight up sold the data.

[–] baggins 2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Consideration does not have to just mean monetary payment

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I don't think I said that? Consideration is any kind of payment, money or otherwise. The terminology of the law also says this, "monetary or other value consideration". A discount is not really giving money to someone, but it may be valuable consideration (if it is part of a broader deal - a shop shelf discount usually isn't).

[–] baggins 2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

It's the first sentence on your post

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 hours ago

Consideration does not have to just mean monetary payment

Your statement implies there are other forms of payment than monetary.

Firstly, “consideration” in this context means payment.

My statement did not state monetary payments only, just payment generally. I clarified 2 sentences later with "in exchange for a payment (money or otherwise)". The point I'm making is that "consideration" is a payment in return for something else, and that payment can either be money or any other valuable item or service.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)