@thelinuxEXP
It might seem obvious, but anyone who offers web browser software, their *browser* has access to the data fetched by requests and anything typed into a form, included files attached to POST data for upload, any bookmarks you create, and the history.
Not surprised if after all the fuss it turns out Mozilla legal decided (for some reason) they needed explicitly state this, and other browser makers merely assume you implicitly accept it when you install or update a browser.
@prlzx I’d be surprised if that was the only reason. Firefox didn’t need that since its inception, and right when they announce a pivot towards AI, they’d suddenly needs terms of use?
Way too close to be a coincidence, IMO
@thelinuxEXP
You surely do accept that every browser in existence needs to access the data used to display web pages (they are downloaded and the DOM built and rendered locally).
They never had published terms before but the browser is doing the same things right now to function that they didn't legally spell out before.
Legal are famously bad at writing in plain language esp when describing technology functions unless skilled in both areas or in a joint team - Mozilla aren't alone in that.
@prlzx Of course a browser needs the data to build the DOM. They don’t need user data though, they don’t need to grant Mozilla a license to use that data. They also don’t need to remove all mentions of not selling data from their website. They also don’t need to focus on AI, add extensions into people’s webbrowsers, have the capacity to change terms without notifying users, or to add ad tech in the browser without notice. Mozilla has exceeded the goodwill I had for them.
@thelinuxEXP
I just think there's an inherent contradiction between assuming that Mozilla are *secretly* planning to do bad things while making it public by publishing terms of use with constraints defined by the privacy policy.
If they were really trying to be secretive about it as you and others have said they could simply not publish any terms for implicit use at all.
I'm disappointed at how many other people have jumped on the same bandwagon attacking a FOSS product without nuance.
@thelinuxEXP
Btw How may channels have actually spoken with a contact at Mozilla to invite them to discuss this in an interview
before just reporting that intermingles facts, opinions, speculation and historical mistakes with equal gravity
and then telling others to stop using any/all of their products?
