Add-ons/Reviewers/Content Review Guidelines: Difference between revisions

From MozillaWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(→‎Sexual Content: per Andreas' edits)
(→‎Copyright or Trademark Violations: updates to acceptable use for adding "Mozilla" or "Firefox" to add-on name)
 
(17 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Add-on content reviewers help ensure that extensions listed on addons.mozilla.org (AMO) adhere to Mozilla’s Acceptable Use Policy.  
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.
 
=== Exceptions ===
Add-ons that are in the [https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/search/?recommended=true&sort=random&type=extension Recommended Extensions Program] or that have been developed by [https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/user/4757633/ an internal team at Mozilla] are exempt from content review. This is because the add-ons team is actively managing relationships with those developers and is working with them on their AMO listing.
 
If you have any questions about any of these extensions, please ask an admin.


==Guidelines for Content Review==
==Guidelines for Content Review==
Line 13: Line 21:
Add-ons that are clearly spam should be rejected. Some indicators of spam include:  
Add-ons that are clearly spam should be rejected. Some indicators of spam include:  
* Large content block of SEO search terms
* Large content block of SEO search terms
* Links to websites that are unrelated to the Firefox extension
* 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====  
====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 [http://www.mozilla.org/about/legal.html legal team].
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 [http://www.mozilla.org/about/legal.html 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.”
For Mozilla trademarks, the usage of “Mozilla” and “Firefox” are not allowed in the add-on name and will be programmatically rejected by the add-ons linter upon submission or update, even in cases of "ADD-ON for Firefox."
* Exceptions to this are extensions that are officially owned by the [https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/user/4757633/ 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 [https://extensionworkshop.com/documentation/publish/self-distribution/ 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.


====Sexual Content====
====Sexual Content====
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 addon-content-reviewers@mozilla.com and include the following:  
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  
* Review URL  
* Short description of the image
* Short description of the image
==Content Review Examples==
You can find examples of content review on this [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jRe2iKkMcOBUF5tEXDwnaEXkJMk-JiRuNjPJB4jHWjk/edit?folder=1K5tL5Lg2GkjmAjdoama36fJLs9JTRneh# document]. Note that you will need to be under NDA to view this doc.


==Review Process==
==Review Process==
1. Log in to https://reviewers.addons.mozilla.org/editors/queue/content_review.  
1. Log in to addons.mozilla.org and access the [https://bit.ly/amocontent reviewer tools].  


2. Select the Content Review queue. This will list include all submitted extensions that need a content review.  
2. Click on an add-on in the queue to start reviewing its content.


3. 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.  


4. Check to make sure the extension listing clearly describes what the extension does, and would be understandable to users who do not have domain knowledge of the service the add-on is working with. The following fields must be filled out:
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.  
* Title
* Summary
* Description (only if the summary doesn’t say it all)


If an extension looks unobjectionable (i.e., not spam) and does not have a description, use the reviewer tool to request information from the developer and ask them to include a description.
4. Check the content of the following fields to make sure it adheres to the [https://www.mozilla.org/about/legal/acceptable-use/ Acceptable Use Policy]:  
 
5. Check the following information to make sure it adheres to the Acceptable Use Policy:  
* Title
* Title
* Icon
* Icon
* Description
* Description
* Screenshot content
* Screenshot content
* Author name


Note: if you see that an author’s name violates the Acceptable Use Policy, please escalate to an admin.
==Review Actions==


6. If the extension complies with the policy, click “Approve.” You can move on to the next extension.  
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.
* If the extension does not adhere to the policy, click “Reject.”  Select all versions and enter the rejection message in the box.  
 
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).  
* 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).


==Escalation==
==Escalation==
If you are not sure about whether something is acceptable or not, escalate it to a staff reviewer. Don’t reject immediately.
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 on IRC in the channel #addon-reviewers or by clicking ‘Request Super Review’ in the review tools.
You can contact staff reviewers by clicking ‘Request Super Review’ in the review tools. In the text area, describe the issue.

Latest revision as of 17:52, 28 May 2020

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.

Exceptions

Add-ons that are in the Recommended Extensions Program or that have been developed by an internal team at Mozilla are exempt from content review. This is because the add-ons team is actively managing relationships with those developers and is working with them on their AMO listing.

If you have any questions about any of these extensions, please ask an admin.

Guidelines for Content Review

Acceptable Use

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:

Spam

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 not allowed in the add-on name and will be programmatically rejected by the add-ons linter upon submission or update, even in cases of "ADD-ON 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.

Sexual Content

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.

Review Process

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:

  • Title
  • Icon
  • Description
  • Screenshot content
  • Author name

Review Actions

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).

Escalation

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.