[handoflixue]

Full context, from the link YOU provided: ""Mozilla doesn’t sell data about you (in the way that most people think about “selling data“), and we don’t buy data about you. Since we strive for transparency, and the LEGAL definition of “sale of data“ is extremely broad in some places, we’ve had to step back from making the definitive statements you know and love."

There is no reasonable way to read this as an attempt to sell your data. This quote is also reiterated in the linked Privacy FAQ on their official site: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/faq/

[roelschroeven]

That text continues with this:

> We still put a lot of work into making sure that the data that we share with our partners (which we need to do to make Firefox commercially viable) is stripped of any identifying information, or shared only in the aggregate, or is put through our privacy preserving technologies (like OHTTP).

So they share data with partners, which helps to make Firefox commercially viable, meaning those partners pay them for that data. Or in other words, Mozilla sells user data. Even when anonymized or aggregated, it's still selling data.

[rawdatadaniel]

On https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/firefox/update-on-terms..., they give an example of an overly broad definition of "selling" from California:

> "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 [a] business to another business or a third party” in exchange for “monetary” or “other valuable consideration."

I read that definition, and think to myself... "transferring" ... yeah, a web browser definitely has to transfer data ... "to a third party" ... yeah, web browsers have to send that data to web servers owned by other people. Silly California! That's not selling!

Oh wait, there's more. ... "in exchange for monetary or other valuable consideration". ... oh. Yeah. I would call that selling too. How is that a broad definition? Rather than broad, I would call it comprehensive.

So Mozilla has had to stop saying they are not selling your data because... they are actually selling your data. Or else they have plans to do so.

[int_19h]

Is there an actual genuine legal threat or something that prompted this change, or is it just some bored lawyer.