$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.

[–] pory@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

The thing is, I don't want Mozilla to be "really this shouldn't be called selling" my info either. This was my call to jump ship to a fork that doesn't give any data to Mozilla in the first place by adopting a downstream fork.

I probably already wasn't giving Mozilla any data to "not sell" in the first place, since I've got telemetry disabled and used about:config to strip out all of their non-browsing functions. But why trust a "probably" that also inevitably needs more attention when they roll in some AI assistant nonsense I don't want (or whatever) when I can just find a fork of their FOSS product that's run by people that don't want my data in the first place?

[–] droplet6585@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago (1 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?

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 1 points 1 month ago (1 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.

[–] Colloidal@programming.dev 1 points 1 month ago

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.