this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2025
40 points (97.6% liked)

Firefox

18694 readers
111 users here now

A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 26 points 8 hours ago (3 children)

When you upload or input information through Firefox, you hereby grant us a nonexclusive, royalty-free, worldwide license to use that information to help you navigate, experience, and interact with online content as you indicate with your use of Firefox.

What? This sounds way too broad, as if everything we do can be used by Mozilla to do whatever they want.

[–] kamills 9 points 8 hours ago

I'm pretty sure that's exactly what it means. It's no longer a browser focused on privacy

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 hours ago

I really hope an explanation is forthcoming as to why they need all data. It is concerning that a "privacy-focused" browser doesn't take the time to explain that.

Until they do, I think I'm gonna give WaterFox a whirl.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Sounds pretty concerning, but I can't find it in the article. Where did you find it?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (2 children)

Seems reasonable enough. Pretty short and nothing unexpected. Seems like legal box-ticking to me. Honestly I'm quite surprised they didn't have a Terms of Use, so it's about time.

This is a slightly odd clause though:

Any liability for Mozilla under this agreement is limited to $500.

They disclaim any liability for use of FF, but if they do have any liability then it's limited to $500? I doubt this will ever come up but it just feels odd.

I've not read the privacy notice yet.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 hours ago

They disclaim any liability for use of FF, but if they do have any liability then it’s limited to $500? I doubt this will ever come up but it just feels odd.

Some jurisdictions don't allow disclaiming liability, this is kind of a fall-back when that happens to attempt to limit damages. Pretty standard legal language.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 hours ago

Hahahahahahaha suuuuure it's limited to $500.