You are wrong in your understanding as well. The human rights charter is not legally binding and it was signed by only 48 of the initial UN members. It merely

You are wrong in your understanding as well. The human rights charter is not legally binding and it was signed by only 48 of the initial UN members. It merely reflects the beleiefs of some UN memebers at the time. I think in the end,if national sovreignity means anything at all then human rights is defined by each nation's laws. For example, if Germany invaded the US to liberate americans from lack of universal healthcare which they as a nation consider to be a human right for americans are they justified? If you believe so then yes what mozilla did is alright. My argument is,for it to be a human right,you need historical precedence and universal (not a mere majority) acceptance. It is a right you attain simply for being human and nothing more. Let me take it a step further,if a prisoner's privacy is taken away (which is the case in every prison) then is that person's human right beinf violated every day? If so,please let's talk about that because you lose privacy for being arrested even without a trial or conviction!