• vaguerant@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    Ā·
    8 days ago

    I think the part Iā€™m unclear about is what definition of selling Mozilla was using before. Hereā€™s the update they posted to clarify the changes: https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/firefox/update-on-terms-of-use/

    Mozilla doesnā€™t sell data about you (in the way that most people think about ā€œselling dataā€), and we donā€™t buy data about you. We changed our language because some jurisdictions define ā€œsellā€ more broadly than most people would usually understand that word. [ā€¦]

    The reason weā€™ve stepped away from making blanket claims that ā€œWe never sell your dataā€ is because, in some places, the LEGAL definition of ā€œsale of dataā€ is broad and evolving. As an example, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) defines ā€œsaleā€ as the ā€œselling, renting, releasing, disclosing, disseminating, making available, transferring, or otherwise communicating orally, in writing, or by electronic or other means, a consumerā€™s personal information by [a] business to another business or a third partyā€ in exchange for ā€œmonetaryā€ or ā€œother valuable consideration.ā€

    Iā€™m not trying to be a dick or anythingā€“that comes naturallyā€“but yeah, Mozilla. Exchanging a good or service for money is called selling it. Since this has already been Mozillaā€™s practice for a while and theyā€™re only now removing the promise because the definition of ā€œsellā€ has apparently become so muddied, I donā€™t follow how Mozilla was describing it before now.

    In order to make Firefox commercially viable, there are a number of places where we collect and share some data with our partners, including our optional ads on New Tab and providing sponsored suggestions in the search bar. We set all of this out in our Privacy Notice. Whenever we share data with our partners, we put a lot of work into making sure that the data that we share is stripped of potentially identifying information, or shared only in the aggregate, or is put through our privacy preserving technologies (like OHTTP).

    I think this is really the important part and Mozilla is burying the lede by focussing on the word ā€œsellā€. I think thereā€™s an argument to be made that ā€œyour dataā€ is no longer ā€œyour dataā€ once it has been de-identified. I donā€™t agree with that argument, but I find it more convincing than this Clinton-esque ā€œIt depends on what the meaning of the word ā€˜sellā€™ isā€ stuff. Mozilla isnā€™t selling ā€œyour dataā€ in the sense of your name and phone number, but they are selling ā€œall data typesā€, de-identified, anonymized, pseudonymized and/or in aggregate, about you.

    I would still argue that that is your data and that by selling it, Mozilla is and has been selling your data. Itā€™s nice that Mozilla isnā€™t blasting anybodyā€™s actual personal biographical details to all their advertising partners, but itā€™s misleading to say thatā€™s the only way ā€œselling dataā€ is understood.

    • owl_herd@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      Ā·
      8 days ago

      These are some fair points. Thinking in the angle that they were kinda selling data for a while but just told us now bc of a new law; and are now muddying the wordā€™s meaning and shading on the california law to save face; does make Mozilla look pretty bad. It makes them look worse if they were doing this for a while and told us just now.

      I wonder if checking out of ads and data sending does stop all this from the userā€™s end or if thatā€™s just a suggestive tick box.