Never heard of that one, I was telling somebody the other day about IceWeasel. So there definitely are FF clones. Or I guess you could just compile Firefox yourself and remove the denylist portion of the code. Would be extra funny if they compiled a version specific for France (because why block sites for everybody else?) and put it next to the regular one on their website with text that said oh BTW if you’re in France definitely only download this version, wink wink.
Yes but 90% of the people using Firefox won’t bother or notice. I already struggle trying to make all my relatives switch to Firefox, I can’t imagine getting them to download a specific version or build it themselves…
Honestly, if pornography gets blocked I’m fine with the collateral damage of political silencing. Quite frankly, there isn’t much I wouldn’t put up with for that to be blocked
And if you bothered to invest a fifth of a third of a quarter of the energy you’re putting into being defensive into helping solve the problem, we wouldn’t be here.
And I took your comment as immature negativity only to find out it’s jealous whining at best and concern trolling and forum sliding at worst.
You’re not going to win the argument. All you’re going to do is make things worse. You’re not going to stop us from supporting Firefox in their time of need, or France’s, or the Internet. It’s just not gonna happen.
So go find something better to do with your free time and let the adults talk.
They tried this in the UK and the ISPs is just ignored them. So the government declared its success anyway, despite the fact that essentially nothing had happened, and then stopped talking about it.
These laws always come up by people whose grasp of technology is basically, make magic box do thing x. They don’t understand that people smarter than them (school kids) will find workarounds in about 10 seconds.
And the thing is, there are open source internet browsers that can be written to avoid any browser checks that a law might require.
However, if Google’s browser DRM gets widely implemented, a browser-side content blocker would be effective, because all those open source browsers would be unable to access the wider web.
I think if Big Brother Browser with Google DRM is our future, we’re going to see people using 2 browsers as standard. They’ll have one “corporate” internet browser, for Instagram, Amazon, whatever. And one “free” browser for all the grey area stuff.
Yes, but we need to fight them politically as it’s our money being wasted and they do cause some harms. One is, it keeps the population uninformed about what is with and against the grain of technology. But we also want them to not be trying to do wrong things, even if they are probably unworkable.
Oh yeah, let the government decide on censorship. I see nothing wrong with that. Oh! I know, let’s have a point system based on how much they support the governments policies too!
Firefox being free software, it wouldn’t make much sense for them to try and do something like this. So obviously we know that Mozilla would never go along with such an absurd law and start doing censorship on behalf of France. … right, Mozilla? Slightly strange that you didn’t say so?
They could still charge the leadership, fine them, and cause life to be a bit more difficult. Even if I don't live in a country, I wouldn't want that hanging over my head.
Firefox is open source but it’s controlled by the Mozilla Foundation.
The steps would be
Pass the law
Tell Mozilla they’re breaking the law
Do things to them as they’re breaking the law
It could be fines, it could be banning firefox in France. The good/bad roles are flipped, but anything anyone has tried to do to meta can be done to Mozilla, too. The only alternative Mozilla would have would be purposefully pulling Firefox from France.
Ultimately, Mozilla would have a vote of some kind, deciding to capitulate or pull firefox (or just keep paying fees, potentially, but they’re not made of money).
What stops them from putting a blanket statement on their website stating “this software does not adhere to specific internet laws in france and therefor we do not support the use of firefox as a browser within french borders. French people can still download firefox to study the software and use it for local/offline purposes.
Firefox isn’t quite the same as facebook in that its a piece of downloadable software instead of a service website. You don’t need an account. A foreigner can travel while having firefox as the only browser on their laptop and people can still share the program between eachother.
France might create requirements for their isps to not service not adhering browsers but in any way mozzila can keep their hands clean.
Making something available when it’s not legal to do so is still a crime. Mozilla can’t put the burden of “Is this illegal?” on the downloader. On top of that, with the specific nature of this law, they’ll likely get added to this blocked list.
“For research” changes nothing, there isn’t an exception for research in the French law (as far as I know, at least).
Nothing would stop a French person from taking extra steps to circumvent the law, so it’s true that it could be gotten around with a VPN or peer-to-peer sharing of the installer, and Mozilla isn’t liable for that, but also that would still dramatically reduce Firefox installs in France. It isn’t really a good solution for Firefox to need the same steps as piracy for people to access it.
Firefox not needing user accounts isn’t that relevant, because it’s the distribution of illegal software that will be acted upon.
While it’s true that they wouldn’t necessarily have to pay a French fine, most large companies have assets in a lot of nations. For Mozilla, this could be people that translate the browser to French, who may have office space or supplies, and the French government could seize Mozilla’s French assets, which also impacts their other projects like Thunderbird.
A search tells me they do have such an office in Paris which would be threatened by their noncompliance, which does include just telling French people it’s illegal but letting them do it anyway.
Its gonna depend on specifics in the law. Is it about
a software component that allows viewing a web page.
software that is marketed as an internet browser
software that is being used to connect to the web
Many software is or can technically be used to browse the web. Thunderbird as a notable example is a mail client but is a capable of displaying any weburl. Some of the software i use on my job is capable of doing the same. Visual studio can do this. It used to be a very common feature.
The ad window when you start steam works like this and the inbuild steam Browser aside the entire steam store also functions as a locked down browser. It even shows a url bar but at least here you cant enter any url.
Depending on the law these softwares need to either comply or be excempt.
With self hosting getting popular and the trend of webapps (many of the self hosted ai apps) you dont need to be online to have a valid usecase.
If i go on holiday to France, never connect to any french internet but use a self developed browser to acces a local run webbapp am I suddenly a criminal?
If i am an open source developer workin on any of the plenty of github repos that rely or build on mozzilas open source code am i a criminal? Should GitHub be blocked because it provided acces to those repos to the french?
I do agree if mozilla has a registered company in french that those could indeed be targeted by the government but if there not surely they cant be blamed by simply ignoring foreign laws.
Piracy and porn can have wildly different laws around the world i only ever heard of countries blocking providing domains trough isps and never that far away foreign companies are supposed to take notice of local Law.
The account thing matters because this establishes a relation of client and service provider. Facebook services millions of european customers and businesses of which it actively manages data. Mozilla in contrast mostly just build a tool that any anonymous internet person can use for themselves.
Mozilla still has terms and conditions, so there’s still a relationship, and still a liability for them letting a customer misuse their browser, even if they don’t keep data on everyone.
While I absolutely agree it’s ridiculous, as I read it, it would also apply to self-hosted software and things like thunderbird that are technically a browser.
Still, I expect enforcement to really only care about “real” browsers, not one user and their own thing or someone using Thunderbird to browse the web. France (and most other governments) have shown multiple times that they don’t really look into the how they’d do these things before they try to make it law and it’d be a mess.
As per the article this post linked, this would definitely be a new precedent, browsers have never been responsible for this content, and whatever actually happens is up in the air. I’m mostly talking worst-case scenario. It’s entirely possible some other business or consumer protection law makes this unenforceable, or any number of other situations, but since the French government decides how unreasonable they’re gonna be, that’s all up to them. Maybe they crusade against Firefox, maybe they give up when they realize there’s only so much to do without drafting even more, and maybe they do go after everyone, including thunderbird or any other app that opens a webpage. Probably just ones that navigate to the illegal webpages though.
Still, a measure that’s completely defeated by a VPN, unless they add all of them to their illegal pages.
I guess it cannot be completely enforced. What they can do, however, is to say that Firefox is illegal in France unless it complies with their unjust laws.
Mozilla could either choose to comply and release a French version of Firefox with government mandated fixes, or decide not to comply and probably block firefox.com from being accessible from France. This would make it harder for French users to find an alternative browser, making even more people will stick to the pre-installed Chromium based one.
In general it's just not a good thing when open source software becomes illegal, no matter how hard the laws might be to implement.
This would make it harder for French users to find an alternative browser, making even more people will stick to the pre-installed Chromium based one.
Sad as it is, I think this is the optimal solution when it goes through. A lot of EU countries are against monopolies (France is not an exception), this way they would realize they are enforcing a monopoly and singular dependency.
I agree. If you give in to laws like these you have already lost; people will just accept their freedom being stripped away piece by piece, and government control of software will be the new normal. If on the other hand we reach a point where Firefox is illegal in France, it should be obvious to anyone and especially those involved in competition law that something is not right.
France is on a bad spree lately, and honestly they need all the bad publicity they can get. I hope this backfires for them.
They dont consider chromium based browsere a monopoly because there are over 10 different ones from different companies. The fact they are all chromium behind the scenes and all comply with google’s bullshit standards doesnt matter to them.
Unless every browser ignores them. Then what they’re going to fine Microsoft, Google, and Mozilla and declare the internet illegal in France?
It just seems so absurd I can’t take it seriously. There’s zero way to make this actually work. If they want to ban websites they’d have to go full China on it.
Why would it be mozzilas responsibility to make their website unaccesible in france rather then that being the responsibility of french isp?
If north Korea puts up an obscure law that says all sites are banned from using english does that give them grounds to sue any sites that didn’t think of blocking them specifically?
I hope that it would only be the "Frensh Version" of Firefox that implements this and that at least everone outside of France would get a version without this crap. This would then of course, be available to Frensh people to. Hopefully crap laws like this get stoped... lets see
Right, these type of solutions are akin to changing your SSH port number. It works >90% of the time, but anyone skilled or determined can easily bypass these restrictions for given targets.
Its nothing to do with the right wing and everythiny to do with authoratarianism. Left wing authoratarians hate freedom just as much. They just usually attafk different targets.
A globalist leaning. Macron if I recall comes from big money in the financial world. The do not have a leaning poltically, they are amoral, dark triad.
And this how the end of a civilization or at least of an era looks like.
The neoliberal system of deregulation of the economy and finance sector, of privatization, of weak states on these topics is crashing right in front of us. It requires now non-democratic, authoritarian, decisions to keep the head outside of the water and not shrinks undersea. The destruction of the environment is a symptom of this end.
A small minority wanted unlimited in a limited world. They wanted to touch the stars and burned their fingers. Like arrogant teenagers, they said it’s nothing and let find solutions that are no more than placebos. But, even this now doesn’t work anymore. They have to use the authoritarian card, another placebo.
It won’t change today. It’s a long process which can be accelerated if the population takes the lead. They know this fact. The authoritarian card is here to keep the population quite by restricting the access to the information “for the general good”. They want to control this aspect of the life too.
But the monster they created is already out of control. It makes and always made more damage than good. They accelerated the neoliberal agenda to keep it calm but it doesn’t work. They are running after it and after their inevitable lost.
slightly off point here but, god I hate the term ‘neoliberal’. the definition is so far from what you would think based on the word alone, it almost seems intentionally misleading. I have the same gripe with “reactionary politics”.
idk when people will realize that capitalism is not conducive to having businesses that are respectful to their consumers and environment, no matter the amount of ill-understood, retrospective regulations you slap on.
EDIT: honestly, I think most people have realized, but the people with the power to change it are the people gaining.
Unfortunately, this is gonna happen and worse. We lost the fight for the internet in 2006, and we’re watching it die. No joke, I started using yandex browser and search since Google ruined theirs, and it is close to perfect. Waterfox is my backup.
I wouldn’t recommend using Yandex, due to it’s connections with the Russian government. You should check out privacyguides.org they have a lot of cool info about privacy respecting tools. However I also don’t recommend anything Brave. The company was founded by a homophobe who was previously in charge of Mozilla, but left, because of community pressure.
Totally! While you’re at it: Make sure to use WeChat and TikTok. Oh, also: Hoyoverse makes great games. They require admin perms but you wouldn’t worry about that.
Yea I just realized what sub this is, I wasn’t aware before. I definitely didn’t mean that it is a private browser. But still, realistically, what can the Russians or Chinese do to me or my data? The danger comes from my government/EU.
If you have Netflix you can check out “The Great Hack”. It’s about Cambridge Analytica and their role in elections. Companies can use your data to change you. Your opinions, who you vote for, what you buy. A lot of stuff.
Secondly: Of course this is not happening. Firefox is an open source browser. If they update it to comply with France’s bs people will just use an older version or people will fork it and cut out the censoring code.
Also, what about lynx or curl? They certainly will not be censoring shit.
France is going to have a very bad time enforcing this.
Have you tried Yandex? Other than being Russian, it is a great browser. And instead of having to use search operators, rephrase or click verbatim on Google to find something, Yandex actually gives you proper search results, especially in photos. It is like Google before 2016. I used Lynx years ago, totally forgot about it.
I use LibreWolf as a browser and Qwant, Startpage, SearX (murena spot) and SwissCows as search engines.
All of these respect my privacy. Yandex doesn’t.
Also:
I just went to Yandex.com. It immediately told me information about my “location” (I fake it). That’s kind of unsettling because I never gave that info or asked for anything related to me or my location. After a single search I got prompted to install the app to search “privately without tracking”. The app is rated 6/10 privacy by Exodus. Exodus lists “Yandex Ad” as one of the app trackers. Sounds lovely.
The search results are quite similar to the ones I would get on SP or Qwant. Nothing special here. Wikipedia, Maps, IMDb, stuff like that. Incredible.
I also need to do captchas regularly, which is very annoying.
It’s not even particularly fast. Qwant Lite approaches warp speed in comparison.
In conclusion:
This search engine is nothing special. If you need their browser for it to do all the fancy stuff you said, it’s basically a piece of shit. Websites that need browser specific code should not exist.
What about HTTP client libraries for every computer language? Even if they went as far as to ban curl and lynx, with many languages you could whip up an HTTP client to pull whatever content you need in five minutes. This might be totally unenforceable at that level as people could modify the library or write code themselves.
I guess you could argue that a simple http client is not a browser, so these would be excluded. But if you write code yourself to use an http client to make a browser, then you would have to implement Frances’s bullshit to be legal in France.
But that depends on how you legally distinguish between a simple http client and a browser…
Ah I’m not talking about being legal or producing a product for others. I’m talking about how one might procure data authorities are trying to make unavailable.
Add comment