@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.
