On 18/06/2015 13:56, B Galliart wrote:
> You claim Pocket(TM) being integrated into the core of Firefox to be 
> pre-installed is justified because "the master goal requires Mozilla to 
> attract and retain users."  As such, Firefox is by extension a Pocket(TM) 
> application.

Asserting this as fact does not make it so.

"Firefox is now a pocket application" is IMHO a completely unreasonable
conclusion to jump to, unless one is deliberately looking for gotchas
with which to hate on this integration.

As Gerv already pointed out earlier in the thread, all of the pocket
code shipping with firefox is open-source and is clearly licensed for
use without agreeing to any terms-of-service.  It's declared right here
at the top of the source file:


https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/file/a3f280b6f8d5/browser/components/pocket/pktApi.js

> According to Pocket(TM)'s Terms of Service, merely by installing a Pocket(TM) 
> application the user should have both read and agreed to the Pocket(TM) Terms 
> of Service and Privacy Policy.  According to Pocket(TM) Privacy Policy, the 
> users are a data point to be sold in the form of aggregated information.

I'm not a lawyer, but I've shipped code under the watchful eye of
Mozilla's laywers, and ToS acceptance is something they take very
seriously.  My team recently had to remove a feature from an (unrelated)
project because we were not appropriately surfacing agreement to the
terms of a third-party service.

I am in broad agreement that there's a lot about this integration that
could have been communicated better, coordinated better, and generally
made more transparent.

But to suggest that this integration suddenly springs unrelated and
unsurfaced ToS on our unsuspecting users seems like a fanciful overreach
to me.


  Ryan
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Reply via email to