this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2025
425 points (99.1% liked)

Open Source

34022 readers
156 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Thought this was interesting and worth knowing about

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 67 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (22 children)

$6M, but if you look at the California law that spurred this change, the Privacy Policy that hasn't changed since July 2024, and the revised ToS, this looks mostly like a really, really, really stupid communication error.

It's one of those cases where legally, "sell" includes things that most people wouldn't consider a sale in normal parlance, but Mozilla has to comply with the overbroad legal definition; meanwhile, they don't appear to be fundamentally changing anything about how they're operating.

ETA: I'm still moving to LibreWolf (and maybe Ladybird later on). I'm not a lawyer, and expecting people like me to parse legal definitions of commonly understood words is just asinine.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 days ago (5 children)

where legally, "sell" includes things that most people wouldn't consider a sale

Allowing access for valuable consideration is pretty cut and dry. What is the legislation defining beyond that?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago (4 children)

To quote this wiki that did a very good job of breaking down this clusterfuck:

The CCPA defines "selling data" as:

“Sell,” “selling,” “sale,” or “sold,” means selling, renting, releasing, disclosing, disseminating, making available, transferring, or otherwise communicating orally, in writing, or by electronic or other means, a consumer’s personal information by the business to a third party for monetary or other valuable consideration.

The sticking point is that last "other valuable consideration." The question that people should be asking is: "valuable to whom and in what capacity?" Value does not need to be for financial gain; knowledge is valuable to a contractor building a building, for example.

But I recommend reading that wiki breakdown or just watch this video. It's a mess that can't be untangled in a simple Lemmy comment.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I don’t want Mozilla to be handling my personal data in any way. Anonymized usage statistics? I could be convinced to relinquish that. But that’s it.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago (2 children)

From what I understand, usage stats are anonymized, and you can opt out of telemetry. But as I personally move to more hardened and private ways to connect, I'm moving to LibreWolf to err on the side of caution.

It all feels like flying too close to the sun for my taste. I don't like the idea of normalizing policies that aren't cut and dry and easy to understand. Have a legal version and a version for dumb people like me if needed, but don't expect me to play lawyer and connect the dots.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Yes, you can opt out, you simply send an request with your data to Alphabet INC.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

I’m with you. Those TOUs are unacceptable.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)