I received an email today telling me that Detrumpify had been removed from the Mozilla Add-Ons store because it violated their Terms of Service. There was not, IMHO, nearly enough information in the message to determine how it supposedly violated them, but they claim it threatens protected groups. (would-be oligarchs?)
Detrumpify for Firefox went up in June of 2016, making it nearly 9 years old. In all that time it never had a complaint of abuse. Last week, I released a version for Firefox on Android. Perhaps that is what precipitated the renewed attention from thin-skinned Trump fans.
Regardless, I’ll do what I can to challenge this, but it may be that Detrumpify for FF will be permanently gone. If so, I would not be surprised to see it removed from the Chome Web Store as well.
Mozilla’s entire message:
Hello,
Your Extension Detrumpify was manually reviewed by the Mozilla Add-ons team based on a report we received from a third party.
Our review found that your content violates the following Mozilla policy or policies:
– Acceptable Use, specifically Hateful content: This content does not comply with Mozilla’s prohibition of content that degrades, intimidates, incites violence against, or encourages prejudice against members of a protected group. (See <https://www.mozilla.org/about/legal/acceptable-use/>.)
Based on that finding, your Extension has been permanently disabled on https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/developers/addon/709999/versions and is no longer available for download from Mozilla Add-ons, anywhere in the world. Users who have previously installed your add-on will be able to continue using it.
More information about Mozilla’s add-on policies can be found at https://extensionworkshop.com/documentation/publish/add-on-policies/.
If you believe that you did not violate Mozilla’s policies, or that this decision was otherwise made in error, you have the right to appeal this decision within 6 months from the date of this email. See <<redacted link>> for details on the appeal process, including how to file an appeal for this specific decision. You may also choose to have this decision reviewed by a third party neutral arbiter, or to seek judicial redress in a court of law.Thank you for your attention.
[ref:<<redacted_jd>>]
—
Mozilla Add-ons Team
https://addons.mozilla.org
I’d recommend/request, in the meantime, to do what the Bypass Paywalls extension did: Host on a github-style website. They are still updating on a regular basis, but had to be removed for “copyright” reasons.
Yes, I could theoretically self-distribute. I could use this website or github. However, to install the extension it still need to be signed by Mozilla.
When I tried to do so, I got the following message:
WebExtError: Submission failed (2): Forbidden{
"detail": "You do not have permission to perform this action.",
"is_disabled_by_developer": false,
"is_disabled_by_mozilla": true
}
I think I can probably trick the system by creating a “new” extension with a different name and the same code, but I have to think about whether I want to try that first.
You might be able to have it signed by the online portal. Reviewing the add-on policies, it notes: “All add-ons submitted for listing on addons.mozilla.org are subject to Mozilla’s Acceptable Use Policy”, which is what that email was referencing. I’d check the following pages:
https://extensionworkshop.com/documentation/publish/signing-and-distribution-overview/
https://extensionworkshop.com/documentation/publish/add-on-policies/
https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/legal/acceptable-use/
There may still be an issue based on the Add-on Distribution Agreement, specifically: “7 (b): Removal from Distribution by Mozilla. … Mozilla reserves the right … [to] remove … [any] Self-distributed Add-ons … This applies … [to] Add-ons … [that] is in any way harmful or objectionable.” https://extensionworkshop.com/documentation/publish/firefox-add-on-distribution-agreement/
Alternatively, you might be able to bring it in compliance by tailoring the embedded default lists to be very milktoast.
Thanks. It’s pretty clear to me that the system is refusing to sign the comment because they have already deeemed the extension unacceptable. It doesn’t matter how it is hosted; they just won’t sign it.
I could certainly curtail the list of insults, but without any guidance from Mozilla, I don’t really see how I can do it. Unless they get back to me with more info on what they don’t like, it’ll be hard to get this extension approved.
I was angry for a few days, but not I am starting to think that maybe FF just doesn’t have much of a future. This change seemed to happedn simultaneously with their curtailing their privacy guarantees. It’s just enshittification.
I have been using Chromium as my default for awhile. Not great, not terrible.