They should explain what happens in technical terms because it’s more confusing every day.

Mozilla doesn’t sell data about you (in the way that most people think about “selling data”)

It looks like the pride and accomplissement of Electronic Arts. They will fuck us but don’t have the guts to say it out loud.

better address legal minutia around terms like “sells.”

When you’re masturbating over the meaning of a simple word, you should stop everything and focus on better endeavors.

As an example, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) defines “sale” as the “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.”

In order to make Firefox commercially viable, there are a number of places where we collect and share some data with our partners, including our optional ads on New Tab and providing sponsored suggestions in the search bar.

Cool so you sell that data? Just be honest instead of pretending to be the good guys, this is exhausting.

The damage is done. Trying to calm down users with legal mumbo-jumbo doesn't work in a privacy-focused userbase.

They have gone from:

Unlike other companies, we don’t sell access to your 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.

To (paraphrasing) "Ahh, well, we don't have ownership, we just have a nonexclusive, royalty-free, worldwide license for the purpose of doing as you request with the content. We can also process your data as we describe in the Firefox Privacy Policy.... Ah, and, of course, we may change the policy in any way we want and you automatically agree with it by continuing using the service".

In the past, they used language that included very specific limits on how the data could be used. Now, they make no promises and obfuscate the possibilities by providing 'examples' of ways that the data might be used.

If they were serious about privacy, the minimum would be to be transparent and specific about the data use. The lack of specificity makes it abundantly clear that they intend to use the data in ways that users would disapprove.