Misunderstanding of legalese may have lead a lot of us down the wrong road.
That’s not going to keep them from selling it.
Their defense is the need to keep Firefox “financially viable”, but if that keeps them from being able to broadly state that they won’t sell our data, it’s better to use a fork that prevents Mozilla from accessing that data in the first place.
I learned a new term today that illustrates this move. Warrant canary. When a company disappears a promise it’s like a canary in a coal mine.
Many sites have done this over the years. It’s called a warrant canary because in the footer, they’d say “we don’t comply with law-enforcement requests” … then comes the warrant, and the wording is removed.
They do not get ownership, but a license to do what they want with it. Giving a license does not change ownership, yes they are correct with this.
