4 ms·

No, they cannot. You're replying to a comment where I've broken the sentence down into smaller parts. It's the best I can do.

koakuma-chan 2y ago
How is "to help you navigate, experience, and interact with online content" different from "to do anything we want with it"?
- janalsncm 2y ago
  > navigate, experience, and interact with online content I can do all of those things just fine without Mozilla also experiencing my online content.
- chmod775 2y ago
  The last part of the sentence narrows it down, as does the first part.
  - koakuma-chan 2y ago
    It doesn't narrow anything down unless they say specifically what they do.
    - chmod775 2y ago
      They only have license to use the data in order to realize the intent of the user, how much more specific than that can it get?
      - koakuma-chan 2y ago
        And the means of realization are up to Mozilla. In other words they can do whatever they want. If my intent is to type something into the searchbar and get redirected to the search engine website, there is no reason why Mozilla would need to know about this.
        chmod775 2y ago
        > there is no reason why Mozilla would need to know about this. Precisely. That's why it's not covered by the license.
        koakuma-chan 2y ago
        > That's why it's not covered by the license. It says it is.
        chmod775 2y ago
        No. It doesn't say that. If you want to claim otherwise, show where it says that and elaborate. This style of "argument" leads nowhere. You're stringing together vague statements and claims, leaving it to the imagination of the reader to tie them into the matter at hand. Maybe you want to do your own dissection of the sentence we are arguing about to make your reading of it clear.
        qiqitori 2y ago
        I think you're interpreting "as you indicate with your use of Firefox." in some weird charitable way. Law doesn't work like that.
        chmod775 2y ago
        No, I'm not. I'm interpreting it precisely as written using the rules of the English language. Lawyers get paid good money to word them very precisely.
        sirz_benjie 2y ago
        I appreciate your candor and good-faith, benefit-of-the-doubt reading of this clause. However, > Lawyers get paid good money to word them very precisely. This is true, but not in the way you are presenting. The precision is often to provide unilateral freedom under the guise of protection. They will "lawyer" you. "As indicated by you" is a grossly broad phrase. An indication is not an express, enthusiastic consent. (FWIW browsers have a lot of lessons to learn from sexual misconduct training, but I digress). Importantly, you are making an implicit assumption that actually is not protected by the statement. And that is when the intention was shared. If you accept the terms of a Mozilla service elsewhere that indicate you are amenable to, for instance, being served ads in exchange for using the browser a certain way --it can now be argued that the data can be exfiltrated. So, there are two points of failure with your assessment. 1. "Indicated by you" is subjective and Mozilla can solidly argue implicit consent or action 2. The indication need not be contained to the same operation which which the information in question is being sent.
      - inetknght 2y ago
        They didn't need a license before. Why should they need one now?
        genewitch 2y ago
        Law degress are expensive
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
        chmod775 2y ago
        Do they need to secure a license in such a way? Probably not. Would that fact at all change what the sentence in their TOS means? Nope. Whether or not the sentence needs to be there has no bearing on its meaning.
        inetknght 2y ago
        That's a wonderful non-answer. It's really showing how much leeway you're giving Mozilla for this overreach. What changed? Why do they need it now?!
        chmod775 2y ago
        I'm not here to defend or attack Mozilla. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43205587 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43205587
      - akimbostrawman 2y ago
        "The intend of the user is to experience the best browsing experience hence we upload and sell all data for training to improve that experience" This is why broad "boilerplate" agreements are unacceptable especially from a self proclaimed savior of online privacy such as Mozilla.
- jcranmer 2y ago
  My guess is the first phrase is lawyer-brain for "we send the words you typed in the search bar to the search engine for you." (Yes, they need your express permission to do that, because copyright law is really fucking dumb and makes absolutely no sense if you're approaching it from engineer-brain.)
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
  My browser sent a request that starts with “POST” in order to tell this website to create this comment but it includes the words that I wrote and therefore “own” as far as copyright is concerned. Mozilla requests a license to send such data to websites in similar contexts as, in this case, I “indicate” by clicking the “reply” button. Other uses of that data are not licensed. For example, using that data in an unrelated request they send to themselves, not indicated by clicking reply, is not licensed.
  - koakuma-chan 2y ago
    This is nonsense. Does curl need a license to send HTTP requests for me?
    - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
      > Does curl need a license to send HTTP requests for me? No, but if they had one and it was phrased like this one, the license itself would be limited to these activities. If you want something to decry from Mozilla's terms, pay attention to this part: > Every once in a while, Mozilla may decide to update these Terms. We will post the updated Terms online. We will take your continued use of Firefox as acceptance of such changes. We will post an effective date at the top of this page to make it clear when we made our most recent update. Note that they even tell you that you can check for yourself to see if/when they tell you that you've agreed to give them a new license. That is much closer to allowing them to do anything they want than what the current license allows. Regardless of any of that, the thing to have in mind is that this is an explicit message from Mozilla that you are agreeing to these terms by using firefox and continuing to agree to the terms by using firefox. Not to say this is ideal; just that it's as good a time as any to move on from Mozilla and firefox, especially if one is unhappy with these terms. I say this as someone who has left behind Mozilla and firefox after using it for over a decade. I will continue to be on the look out for and supportive of alternatives. So far librewolf (https://librewolf.net/ https://librewolf.net/) has been an easy pick-up as it's primarily just firefox with telemetry turned off.
  - plaguuuuuu 2y ago

koakuma-chan 2y ago

How is "to help you navigate, experience, and interact with online content" different from "to do anything we want with it"?

janalsncm 2y ago
> navigate, experience, and interact with online content I can do all of those things just fine without Mozilla also experiencing my online content.
chmod775 2y ago
The last part of the sentence narrows it down, as does the first part.
- koakuma-chan 2y ago
  It doesn't narrow anything down unless they say specifically what they do.
  - chmod775 2y ago
    They only have license to use the data in order to realize the intent of the user, how much more specific than that can it get?
    - koakuma-chan 2y ago
      And the means of realization are up to Mozilla. In other words they can do whatever they want. If my intent is to type something into the searchbar and get redirected to the search engine website, there is no reason why Mozilla would need to know about this.
      - chmod775 2y ago
        > there is no reason why Mozilla would need to know about this. Precisely. That's why it's not covered by the license.
        koakuma-chan 2y ago
        > That's why it's not covered by the license. It says it is.
        chmod775 2y ago
        No. It doesn't say that. If you want to claim otherwise, show where it says that and elaborate. This style of "argument" leads nowhere. You're stringing together vague statements and claims, leaving it to the imagination of the reader to tie them into the matter at hand. Maybe you want to do your own dissection of the sentence we are arguing about to make your reading of it clear.
        qiqitori 2y ago
        I think you're interpreting "as you indicate with your use of Firefox." in some weird charitable way. Law doesn't work like that.
        chmod775 2y ago
        No, I'm not. I'm interpreting it precisely as written using the rules of the English language. Lawyers get paid good money to word them very precisely.
        sirz_benjie 2y ago
        I appreciate your candor and good-faith, benefit-of-the-doubt reading of this clause. However, > Lawyers get paid good money to word them very precisely. This is true, but not in the way you are presenting. The precision is often to provide unilateral freedom under the guise of protection. They will "lawyer" you. "As indicated by you" is a grossly broad phrase. An indication is not an express, enthusiastic consent. (FWIW browsers have a lot of lessons to learn from sexual misconduct training, but I digress). Importantly, you are making an implicit assumption that actually is not protected by the statement. And that is when the intention was shared. If you accept the terms of a Mozilla service elsewhere that indicate you are amenable to, for instance, being served ads in exchange for using the browser a certain way --it can now be argued that the data can be exfiltrated. So, there are two points of failure with your assessment. 1. "Indicated by you" is subjective and Mozilla can solidly argue implicit consent or action 2. The indication need not be contained to the same operation which which the information in question is being sent.
    - inetknght 2y ago
      They didn't need a license before. Why should they need one now?
      - genewitch 2y ago
        Law degress are expensive
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - chmod775 2y ago
        Do they need to secure a license in such a way? Probably not. Would that fact at all change what the sentence in their TOS means? Nope. Whether or not the sentence needs to be there has no bearing on its meaning.
        inetknght 2y ago
        That's a wonderful non-answer. It's really showing how much leeway you're giving Mozilla for this overreach. What changed? Why do they need it now?!
        chmod775 2y ago
        I'm not here to defend or attack Mozilla. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43205587 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43205587
    - akimbostrawman 2y ago
      "The intend of the user is to experience the best browsing experience hence we upload and sell all data for training to improve that experience" This is why broad "boilerplate" agreements are unacceptable especially from a self proclaimed savior of online privacy such as Mozilla.
jcranmer 2y ago
My guess is the first phrase is lawyer-brain for "we send the words you typed in the search bar to the search engine for you." (Yes, they need your express permission to do that, because copyright law is really fucking dumb and makes absolutely no sense if you're approaching it from engineer-brain.)
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
My browser sent a request that starts with “POST” in order to tell this website to create this comment but it includes the words that I wrote and therefore “own” as far as copyright is concerned. Mozilla requests a license to send such data to websites in similar contexts as, in this case, I “indicate” by clicking the “reply” button. Other uses of that data are not licensed. For example, using that data in an unrelated request they send to themselves, not indicated by clicking reply, is not licensed.
- koakuma-chan 2y ago
  This is nonsense. Does curl need a license to send HTTP requests for me?
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
    > Does curl need a license to send HTTP requests for me? No, but if they had one and it was phrased like this one, the license itself would be limited to these activities. If you want something to decry from Mozilla's terms, pay attention to this part: > Every once in a while, Mozilla may decide to update these Terms. We will post the updated Terms online. We will take your continued use of Firefox as acceptance of such changes. We will post an effective date at the top of this page to make it clear when we made our most recent update. Note that they even tell you that you can check for yourself to see if/when they tell you that you've agreed to give them a new license. That is much closer to allowing them to do anything they want than what the current license allows. Regardless of any of that, the thing to have in mind is that this is an explicit message from Mozilla that you are agreeing to these terms by using firefox and continuing to agree to the terms by using firefox. Not to say this is ideal; just that it's as good a time as any to move on from Mozilla and firefox, especially if one is unhappy with these terms. I say this as someone who has left behind Mozilla and firefox after using it for over a decade. I will continue to be on the look out for and supportive of alternatives. So far librewolf (https://librewolf.net/ https://librewolf.net/) has been an easy pick-up as it's primarily just firefox with telemetry turned off.
- plaguuuuuu 2y ago