Add-ons/Reviewers/Content Review Guidelines
Add-on content reviewers help ensure that extensions listed on addons.mozilla.org (AMO) are not spam, are not abusive, and adhere to Mozilla’s Acceptable Use Policy.
Focus of Content Review
The goal of content review is to screen listings on AMO for spam, abuse, and inappropriate content. Content reviewers do not review the code of extensions submitted to AMO unless they have been specifically trained to do so.
Guidelines for Content Review
Mozilla’s Acceptable Use Policy lists criteria for unacceptable content, and these criteria also apply to AMO. Some examples of unacceptable content under this policy that might be found in extension listings include:
- obscene or pornographic images
- hate speech (note: anything that promotes Nazism or uses Nazi symbols must be rejected)
- advertisements for illegal products or services
Add-on content reviews should also adhere to these additional guidelines:
Add-ons that are clearly spam should be rejected. Some indicators of spam include:
- Large content block of SEO search terms
- Links to websites or chat services that are unrelated to the Firefox extension
Duplicate submissions are not necessarily spam. For example, extensions with the same name for multiple locales are acceptable. If you see duplicate submissions, please report them to amo-admins for further investigations.
Copyright or Trademark Violations
With the exception of Mozilla trademarks, reviewers do not handle reports of copyright or trademark infringements. Determining copyright or trademark infringement is a complicated legal process that should be handled by Mozilla’s legal team.
For Mozilla trademarks, the usage of “Mozilla” and “Firefox” are generally not allowed in the add-on name, except in the following format: “ADD-ON NAME for Firefox.”
- Exceptions to this are extensions that are officially owned by the Mozilla account, such as Facebook Container and Firefox Color.
Private Use Add-ons
Extensions that are intended for internal or private use, or for distribution testing, should not be listed on AMO and should be rejected. (These add-ons can be uploaded for self-distribution instead.)
When in doubt if an extensions is intended for internal or private use, ask:
- Can anyone sign up for and immediately get an account to make this extension work productively?
If the answer is “yes,” it is considered public. This includes accounts that require payment (like Netflix).
However, if a user needs to take additional steps beyond registering for an individual account and paying for it, the extension would be considered private. Additional steps might include signing a business contract, being admitted to a specific university, or being a member of a closed club. The number of (potential) users is not relevant for making this determination.
Beta versions of extensions can be listed on AMO as long as it is an open beta for a new product. When their beta extensions are ready for official release, developers should rename their extension to the final release name and not create a new listing on AMO. A beta or test release of an existing product, or a closed beta, should be rejected. You can site https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2018/02/28/discontinuing-support-for-beta-versions/ in the rejection comment.
Add-on Summary and Description
The Add-on Policies state, “The add-on listing should have an easy-to-read description about everything it does, and any information it collects.” The description should include an attempt to describe what the add-on does for its intended audience. Please do not reject an extension if you do not think the description and summary are sufficient. Use the “Reviewer Reply” tool and select the “Incomplete Description” canned response to message the developer. You can customize the canned response as you see fit.
Any child pornography must be escalated to Mozilla for reporting to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC). Please send an email to cneiman [at] mozilla.com and include the following:
- Review URL
- Short description of the image
Content Review Examples
You can find examples of content review on this document. Note that you will need to be under NDA to view this doc.
1. Log in to addons.mozilla.org and access the reviewer tools.
2. Click on an add-on in the queue to start reviewing its content.
3. All information in the listing will be available on the add-on's review page. Developers are required to include a title and summary to list their extension on AMO.
The developer may also include screenshots, an icon, or an expanded description in their listing. This information is nice to have, but it is not mandatory. At this time, we are explicitly recommending that reviewers do not request that the developers include more information in their listing.
4. Check the content of the following fields to make sure it adheres to the Acceptable Use Policy:
- Screenshot content
- Author name
1. If the extension complies with the policy, click “Approve.” and then “Save” to submit the review. You can move on to the next extension.
2. If the extension does not adhere to the guidelines, click “Reject.” Select all versions and enter the rejection message in the box.
- Use an appropriate canned response or clearly describe which information in the listing violates our policy.
- Rejecting an extension will send a message to the developer and remove the extension’s listing on addons.mozilla.org (AMO).
3. If you see that an author’s name violates the Acceptable Use Policy, please escalate to an admin (see below).
If you are not sure about whether something is acceptable or not, escalate it to a staff reviewer. Don’t reject immediately.
You can contact staff reviewers by clicking ‘Request Super Review’ in the review tools. In the text area, describe the issue.