Sorry for the delay, got rate limited.
The Mozilla Corporation sharing user metadata with the Mozilla Foundation to assist with internal decision making may technically meet California's definition of "sale of data" despite constituting absolutely nothing even vaguely resembling what laypeople would consider a "sale of data".
Note that the CCPA's "third party" clause is part of an "OR" set, alongside "another business". Mozilla Foundation and Mozilla Corporation are respectively "another business" relative to each one's self, despite not being unrelated third parties.
The problem is not that Mozilla is actually selling user data (they're not in the sense that any layperson would understand "selling data" to mean), the problem is the way the California law is worded.
As usual, tech-illiterate politicians aren't even competent enough to write laws with the nuance and understanding required to not botch the entirely good and justified intention without pointing a loaded legal gun at the heads of the genuinely innocent. Think along the lines of the CFAA's legal risks to good-faith security researchers¹, or how the DMCA would technically criminalize discussion of how to decode Pig Latin if that was used as a copyrighted media protection technique.
¹ At least up until the Biden administration instructed the DoJ to be more sane and reasonable about this: https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/department-justice-a...