Hi firefox-esr packagers, what is happening wrt. what the Fediverse is full of: Mozilla now requiring users to issue a licence to them (?!) for content input into Firefox, completely(!) deleting its privacy promise, etc.
Is anything of that applicable to Debian, which gets the OSS code from Firefox and builds that on OSS licence terms? Is anything of that applicable to Mozilla services used by Firefox? If so, are these removed from Debian firefox-esr packages? References: • https://hachyderm.io/@dalias/114078137128127216 • https://mastodon.social/@sarahjamielewis/114072293410465140 • https://hachyderm.io/@joeyh/114078580513762598 vs. https://mstdn.social/@BrodieOnLinux/114078303190853233 • https://hachyderm.io/@joeyh/114078238284059938 • https://mastodon.social/@sarahjamielewis/114078061987172475 • https://infosec.exchange/@mttaggart/114077939111560597 • https://corteximplant.com/@mircoxi/114075054152672333 • https://infosec.exchange/@mttaggart/114074054311869646 • … and several older ones I cannot find (with reasonable effort, i.e. invested 20′ already…) right now, and of course thread toot context I’d especially interested how a ToU change can affect a FOSS software at all, given it’s either part of the licence (and thus not acceptable for Debian main) or not (and thus unenforcable). Could be ToS for some service it automatically uses (which Debian packagers normally patch out as phoning home is unacceptable in Debian). https://corteximplant.com/@mircoxi/114075159839539040 says that Mozilla clearly considers the software subject to the AUP for some reason… perhaps time for Iceweasel to rise again, same codebase but without all that Mozilla policy binding. Thanks in advance, //mirabilos -- "Using Lynx is like wearing a really good pair of shades: cuts out the glare and harmful UV (ultra-vanity), and you feel so-o-o COOL." -- Henry Nelson, March 1999
