Information about the New Terms of Use and Updated Privacy Notice for Firefox

[AshleyT]

For the first time, we’re introducing a Terms of Use for Firefox, alongside an updated Privacy Notice.

Earlier today, we published a blog post explaining why we’re making this change and what it means for you.

Now, we want to hear from you.

We’re committed to engaging with our community and keeping you informed about how we build Firefox—and why we make the decisions we do. Firefox wouldn’t be where it is today without the support of our users, and we want to continue working together to build a better internet for all.

To kick off the discussion, here are a few key points from the blog post:

• Transparency matters. We’re introducing a Terms of Use to provide clarity on what users agree to before starting to browse.
• Privacy remains a priority. Our updated Privacy Notice gives a more detailed, easy-to-read explanation of our data practices.
• You stay in control. Firefox is designed to respect user choice, with responsible defaults and simple tools to manage your data.

We’d love to hear your thoughts! Check out the full blog post and share your feedback here. If you have any questions, let us know—we’ll be actively monitoring the discussion and will reply where we can.

Update

Thank you all for taking the time to share your questions and reactions. We’ve been listening and made some updates to address areas of concern. I’ve started a new discussion topic covering what’s changed in the Terms of Use based on your feedback, and clearing up a few points of confusion.

[tpdi]

Does any of this apply to Thunderbird email? They say that they "adhere to the Mozilla Privacy Policy for how we receive, handle, and share information."

Are all my private emails now licensed to Mozilla? Is Mozilla now claiming a license to feed emails from my bank, brokerage, cardiologist, and family to an AI that wants to model advertising to me?

[asdfjklö]

No, this TOS is currently Firefox only. - But keep an eye out for changes to Thunderbird's TOS in the next couple of weeks.

[swaldman]

Mine already are, it seems, because I use a webmail service...

[yoyo-pls-dont]

Lack of Clarity:
I am frustrated by the vague language surrounding what data Mozilla collects and whether it will be sold. I feel that the updates do not provide clear answers about data usage and sharing practices.

Perceived Shift in Values:
I strongly feel that Mozilla is moving away from its foundational promise of user privacy. I feel betrayed by the removal of explicit statements about not selling personal data, leading to fears that Mozilla may now engage in practices similar to other corporations that monetize user data.

Transparency Issues:
I criticiz Mozilla for not being transparent about the specifics of data sharing. I call for detailed disclosures about what data is collected, how it is used, and with whom it is shared.

Community Backlash:
The community response has been overwhelmingly negative, and I am considering abandoning Firefox in favor of alternatives that prioritize privacy. I feel a sense of disillusionment with Mozilla's direction and a belief that the company is prioritizing profit over user trust.

Concerns Over Corporate Practices:
I am concerned that Mozilla's financial struggles are leading to compromises in its commitment to user privacy. Particularly  about the potential for increased data monetization strategies.

[seva]

Your comment looks like it was written by an AI trained on Firefox community data.

[greatwoohoo]

>Now, we want to hear from you.

You have heard from your users, loud and clear. Now it is up to you to decide whether to respect your users or to throw their feedback in the bin.

And we users have a very good idea what you are going to do.

[LeonDerBaertige]

Couple of things come to mind:

• These ToS are very broad and hand over essentially everything, for a websearch feature (which I doubt you would need a license for)? What are the other cases to warrant that much?
• If data is collected. Does the collecting include potentially highly protected information (e.g. medical, access tokens, ...)? And what is done to secure such information properly (in case it is collected) or prevent the collection?
• And could you please stop shooting yourself in the foot while we still have a chance at going up against chrome?

[seva]

I think you should have done something different. You have a lot of users who trust you, and you should have trusted those users.

You should have written openly:

"
Due to new EU laws, Mozilla will cease to exist unless it finds another source of funding. We want to make our own advertising service the source of funding. During the next Firefox update, you can agree or refuse to support Firefox.

If you choose "agree to support Firefox", Firefox will run our advertising service. Please read how our advertising service takes care of your anonymity.

If you click "decline to support Firefox", our advertising service will not run.

Please note: there are many services on the Internet that collect your information. Information about you will be collected, but it will not help save Mozilla.
"

[saphkey]

Yeah, this kind of transparency seems just too obvious.
Do they know know why they are doing what they are doing?? Why would they want us to speculate.
That just leads to speculative doomposting, which is not a good image.

[kittyd]

This level of transparency and honesty in a popup (and it being clearly opt in, not having support checked in by default) would have been all it took for all of the bad faith Mozilla created in recent years to be resolved. Add a link to: Please Donate, with options for one time or per month/year, and we are talking!

Unfortunately, instead the move was to ruin the already stretched very thin legacy of Firefox 😕 They need to handle it as what it is, not with corporate bs, but a clear "We Messed Up" that honestly owns to the issues. I will not keep my hopes up.

[pg_78]

And Mozilla could have asked the "decliners" to consider making a donation. I certainly would have donated.

[strongthany]

I have been a Mozilla fan for a while, and as such often been a apologist for decisions made. I can not see in the phrasing of this update how the new ToS are anything but concerning.

I am imploring Mozilla to not implement these changes, to keep privacy as a core Tennant, and to not implement manifest V3. Please, you're one of the last gold browsers, don't hurt the good will you have held for so long.

[qamodi]

Considering that the definition of "Free Software" contains the right to use the software for whatever purpose and your new policy puts quite some limitations on how Firefox can be used, you should modify all documents claiming that Firefox is Free Software as well.

[asdfjklö]

I'm so angry I made an account.

I would've been fine with a subscription model, where I pay so that Mozilla keeps its privacy promises.

Instead we got sponsored search engine default - the apparently main business model of Mozilla.
Then we got some sponsored suggestions, pages, and what not. Now, Mozilla simply reserves the right to restrict served (as in: browsed) content and abuse (as in: use for AI training) user content. It doesn't matter if someone at Mozilla says this might be a big misunderstanding and it's only meant for such and such purpose:

Legally, anything that is not explicitly excluded or forbidden - is simply allowed.


I will switch to an open-source fork of Firefox like LibreWolf. The damage in my confidence in the Mozilla foundation has been shattered.

[Hissssst]

I will stop using Firefox as of now. And I will make sure that every person who uses it knows that Firefox has a clear intent to collect user data and sell it to advertisers. I will write blog posts, I will create pull requests, I will promote free branches and forks.

I loved Firefox and it is really sad that the software which was a role model for most of other free and opensource projects becomes the thing it was fighting from the very beginning

[BenCos18]

I've been using Firefox for years now and even recommended it to people 

this is the final straw 

either fix your vauge and unethical sneaky tos update or I'm done....the two reasons I use Firefox are manifest v2 and privacy.... those two are non negotiable 

[milet]

What you wrote violates new ToS 😉

[BenCos18]

lol 

posted from Librewolf 

this is basically like watching the end of an empire just even more sad tbh 

[Hissssst]

👎

[bites0411]

Look like its time to pull out , was a good ride but goodbye

[fixmestevie]

Here is what I think of your decision--hi ho, hi ho, its off to another browser I go.

[whyyoudoodis]

[seva]

The picture is nice, but here the dinosaur is supposed to pee on a burning fox

[whyyoudoodis]

Shooting your shot ey.

Firstly ,you spaz your sexist rant is unhinged crazy. Mitchell Baker IS NO LONGER THE CEO you peanut.

[eschatos]

You deleted my constructive and critical comment, claiming it to be spam. For over an hour, you haven't as much as responded to my report. Is this how you deal with people asking you if you're going to abuse their data? Reinstate my comment and answer my questions or I'll be gone.

[whyyoudoodis]

YOU ARE ALL MISSING THE OBVIOUS!

Clearly what has happened since Mitchell Baker left Mozzilla is that the new CEO and the fresh oversight have either
A) Looked at current operative layout and NOTICED that they are ALREADY selling user data and are quickly changing policy in retrospect / ASAP for LEGAL reasons and Firefox is already kaput

B) Firefox CEO changes direction from baker in terms of user policy because they figure income from FUTURE sales can bolster revenue and maybe they can change course > choosing a quick and dirty / stupid mechanism and hoping users wont notice.

C) New CEO takes advantage of Manifest V3 fallout and is has revenue kickback in his pay -  a kunt.

and the least likely

D) They are BROKE and this is agonal gasp.  

I think its ALL OF THE ABOVE

I mean did anybody expect anything different after reading this

[j0s]

When watching closely which replies here are deleted without comment and which are not, it becomes very clear what the agenda behind those changes is.

[whyyoudoodis]

screencap proof and post the elsewhere. Firefox clearly needs the heat. Scrutiny is crucial. 

[salix-triandra]

I am also curious about the removal of the statement about no longer selling user data:

Does Firefox sell your personal data?

Nope. Never have, never will. And we protect you from many of the advertisers who do. Firefox products are designed to protect your privacy. That’s a promise.

This has been removed from the FAQs. Does this removal indicate that user data is now on the market to advertisers?

[seva]

Some projects have the wording "canary" in their legal documents. This is a reference to the canaries that miners took into the mine with them. Canaries are very sensitive to the concentration of gases in the mine, and they sensed it before humans. If the canary started to get nervous or lose consciousness, it meant that dangerous gas was accumulating in the mine and the miners had to evacuate.

Apple had a canary wording that they would not give your information to the government. Now that message is gone.

Firefox had a canary message that Mozilla would not sell your data. Now that canary is dying and the miners have to evacuate.

[nopwrinh0uze]

"when you upload or input information through Firefox, you hereby grant us a nonexclusive, royalty-free, worldwide license to use that information"

Need I say more?

[Erwan]

You forgot the second part even worse : "It also includes a nonexclusive, royalty-free, worldwide license for the purpose of doing as you request with the content you input in Firefox"

NONexclusive = not only intended for Mozilla = available for third parties ???

[seva]

The term "non-exclusive" means that you can also give rights to the data to other people.

For example, you wrote your own book and sent it through Firefox.

If Mozilla gets exclusive rights, you lose the right to sell or send the book to anyone else. Instead, Mozilla gets the right to sell or send your book.

If Mozilla gets non-exclusive rights, Mozilla can sell or send your book, and you can sell or send your book.

[seva]

Sorry, I was a little unclear in my last message.

If you transfer EXCLUSIVE rights to something, it means that you lose the rights to it for the time of the transfer of exclusive rights, and that you do not have the right to grant rights to it to anyone else for the duration of the exclusive rights.

If you transfer NON-EXCLUSIVE rights to something, it means that you do not lose the rights to it, and that you can transfer the rights to it to anyone else.

I think Mozilla did a very humane thing by only requiring non-exclusive rights. This way you do not lose the right to sell your own works that you have submitted using Firefox.

[rdavidatwell]

Please note that most of the comments here have not been racist or misogynist conspiracy theories. But now because of the ones that have, Mozilla, the temptation is going to be to dismiss us all in the same bucket.

Don't.

We have very real concerns about this product and organization. Don't ignore our concerns.

[Atreides]

Please revert these changes. Your position as a leader in data privacy and security means people look to your browser vs Edge/Chrome. If you lose that unique position, people will be sent to fragmented collection of other browsers that might have Cryptomining or some other BS built in. 

Please consider your role and stature as being a long lasting and known quantity in the browser space. That cannot be replicated by another browser nor can it be quantified by earnings reports. 

I hate Chrome but have to use it at work. I love Firefox and use it on my home computer.  

[Emaro]

I have to say this looks really bad, Mozilla. You add ToS to your browser, which is an open source application and not a service (having ToS for your services is legit). And you also remove the promise to not sell users data. Then, when users rightfully complain (since Firefox is advertised as a private browser), you just restate the same things you announced with different words, not really acknowledging users concerns or actually addressing them. Your generic 'we value your privacy' has no value at all, since everyone would say that. Your actions matter, not you claiming to care about privacy.

If you sell user data in the future, I will tell everyone I recommended Firefox in the past to move away from Firefox. Most likely to a privacy-respecting soft-fork of Firefox. I know this is not a sustainable path in the long term. I'd be happy to pay or donate to Firefox development directly. I'm not doing that currently because I don't want to support your AI and advertisement initiatives and it's not possible to directly fund Firefox. I'm not happy at all with the direction you're taking. Please reconsider. Please focus on your core product, your browser. You're the bastion against Chrome's monopoly, but it looks like your on your way to make the distinction irrelevant.

[jaysax]

Seconding all the fantastic points other users have already made here and I just want to state that I don't want AI anywhere near being built into my browser, now or ever.

[whyyoudoodis]

Why do i feel like these are sock/bot accounts designed to pigeonhole everybody that is pissed off about this.

[rdavidatwell]

The thought had certainly occurred to me. It's borderline parody. Even people who march in literal far-right rallies aren't this racist.