Hello,
I am the developer of the original FireShot extension:
Another extension, FireShot, is currently listed on AMO:
I have submitted three reports regarding this extension, but all were rejected with the following response:
“Based on the information provided, we were not able to identify content that does not adhere to Mozilla’s policies…”
I would appreciate guidance on how this situation should be handled.
I performed a direct comparison of the two extension packages and found:
-
141 of 180 files are byte-for-byte identical.
-
The remaining proprietary JavaScript has approximately 93.4% normalized code similarity, with many files exceeding 95–99%.
-
The clone reproduces our proprietary assets, UI, localization files, and internal application architecture.
-
Our original copyright notices have been removed from the copied JavaScript files.
-
Our license permits use of FireShot with Mozilla applications/services only; all other rights are reserved.
As I understand it, this raises issues under Mozilla’s Add-on Ownership / Code Disputes policy, the Firefox Add-on Distribution Agreement §5(c) concerning intellectual-property rights, and Add-on Policy §2(4) concerning forks.
I am not asking the forum to determine copyright infringement. I would simply like to understand:
What evidence or procedure does Mozilla require from the original copyright holder to have an apparent unauthorized source-code clone investigated?
If these matters are handled through a different channel or require a specific type of evidence, please point me in the right direction.
Thank you.