4 ms·

Section 4 of the Jitsi Meet ToS grants them similar rights. It's just with mushier language. > You give 8×8 (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use

Section 4 of the Jitsi Meet ToS grants them similar rights. It's just with mushier language. > You give 8×8 (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works..., communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display, and distribute such content solely for the limited purpose of operating and enabling the Service to work as intended for You and for no other purposes. IANAL, but it seems like that would include training on your data as long as the model was used as part of their service. Everyone who operates a video conferencing service will have some sort of clause like this in their ToS. Zoom is being more explicit, which is generally a good thing. If Jitsi wanted to be equally explicit, they could add something clarifying that this does not include training AI models.

rapnie 3y ago
Self-hosting Jitsi is the better option. Or BigBlueButton, and there are more self-hosted open-source Zoom alternatives.
- samspenc 3y ago
  Do you happen to know of others by any chance. For self-hosted video call solutions, looks like Jitsi and BigBlueButton (BBB) are the only decent options out there.
  - jech 3y ago
    > Do you happen to know of others by any chance. There's Galene, <https://galene.org https://galene.org>. It's easy to deploy, uses minimal server resources, and the server is pretty solid. The client interface is still a little awkward, though. (Full disclosure, I'm the main author.)
  - jfkimmes 3y ago
    There's now also https://github.com/vector-im/element-call https://github.com/vector-im/element-call. They have SFU support as of recently, so it should scale similarly to Jitsi et al.
  - esbeeb 3y ago
    QOS (Quality-of-Service) rules might starve your traffic of bandwidth. Are you sure you have perfect "Net Neutrality" on your side? You would be well advised to use services where the traffic travels through https on port 443 on the server (because it's been my experience that it tends to get pretty good QOS favorability). My own little rule of thumb: "you can connect to any port you want, so long as it's port 443 https." ;)
    - David 3y ago
      On the other hand, tls/443 is pretty undesirable for media delivery in videoconferencing because a) it's tcp-based and the required ACKs mean a big reduction in throughput and increase in latency, especially in the presence of packet loss, and b) most video services these days (and open source servers) use webrtc which encrypts the data in transit already--so the tls encryption is a waste of resources Though tls/443 is usually still supported because it's most often allowed by even restrictive firewalls and networks
nemoniac 3y ago
Wait, what is "the service" here? As I understand it, it refers to using meet.jitsi.si, not "another service" someone might provide by downloading the Jitsi software and running it on their own server. Please correct me if I'm wrong since this would give me cause to reconsider running a Jitsi server.
- unnah 3y ago
  It's "the Service" with capital S, indicating that it is a term specifically defined in the contract. Here "the Service" is defined as "the meet.jit.si service, including related software applications". If that's not vague enough, article 2 gives 8x8 the right to change, modify, etc. the Service at any time without any notice. The guys at 8x8 may be well intentioned, but their lawyers have done their best to not give the customer any basis to sue the company in any foreseeable circumstances. That is what company lawyers do, for better or worse. Regardless, it appears that at present time jitsi is not including AI training in their service, and there is no explicit carve-out in their terms for AI training. However, by article 2 they do have the right to store user content, which might become a problem in the future.
gnicholas 3y ago
> solely for the limited purpose of operating and enabling the Service to work as intended for You and for no other purposes. To me (a former corporate lawyer) the "for You" qualifier would limit their ability to use content to train an AI for use by anyone other than "You". Is there an argument? Yes. But by that argument, they would also be allowed to "publicly perform" my videoconf calls for some flimsy reasons that don't directly benefit me.
- zeusk 3y ago
  it isn't for you solely/exclusively. If it "improves" the service for everyone - that includes "you".
  - gnicholas 3y ago
    Yep, I acknowledge that is a possibility, but it would also lead to them having permission to display literally the entirety of my videonconf calls to anyone, for advertising purposes or some other purpose that only incidentally benefits me. That would be a strained reading IMO.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - Guvante 3y ago
      Additionally courts consider the fact that users have little if any say in the terms and thus tend to take the most restrictive but still reasonable view of any uncertainty in the terms. Basically "if you wanted it you could have asked for it, if you didn't then that is a problem".
      - gnicholas 3y ago
        Yep, contracts of adhesion, and construing against the drafter: both favor the user here.
    - turbojerry 3y ago
r2b2 3y ago
Jitsi App Privacy: → https://apps.apple.com/us/app/jitsi-meet/id1165103905 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/jitsi-meet/id1165103905 And Zoom: → https://apps.apple.com/us/app/id546505307 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/id546505307 Looks like one company likes to gobble data more than the other even if both privacy policies are gobble-open.

rapnie 3y ago

Self-hosting Jitsi is the better option. Or BigBlueButton, and there are more self-hosted open-source Zoom alternatives.

samspenc 3y ago
Do you happen to know of others by any chance. For self-hosted video call solutions, looks like Jitsi and BigBlueButton (BBB) are the only decent options out there.
- jech 3y ago
  > Do you happen to know of others by any chance. There's Galene, <https://galene.org https://galene.org>. It's easy to deploy, uses minimal server resources, and the server is pretty solid. The client interface is still a little awkward, though. (Full disclosure, I'm the main author.)
- jfkimmes 3y ago
  There's now also https://github.com/vector-im/element-call https://github.com/vector-im/element-call. They have SFU support as of recently, so it should scale similarly to Jitsi et al.
- esbeeb 3y ago
  QOS (Quality-of-Service) rules might starve your traffic of bandwidth. Are you sure you have perfect "Net Neutrality" on your side? You would be well advised to use services where the traffic travels through https on port 443 on the server (because it's been my experience that it tends to get pretty good QOS favorability). My own little rule of thumb: "you can connect to any port you want, so long as it's port 443 https." ;)
  - David 3y ago
    On the other hand, tls/443 is pretty undesirable for media delivery in videoconferencing because a) it's tcp-based and the required ACKs mean a big reduction in throughput and increase in latency, especially in the presence of packet loss, and b) most video services these days (and open source servers) use webrtc which encrypts the data in transit already--so the tls encryption is a waste of resources Though tls/443 is usually still supported because it's most often allowed by even restrictive firewalls and networks

nemoniac 3y ago

Wait, what is "the service" here? As I understand it, it refers to using meet.jitsi.si, not "another service" someone might provide by downloading the Jitsi software and running it on their own server. Please correct me if I'm wrong since this would give me cause to reconsider running a Jitsi server.

unnah 3y ago
It's "the Service" with capital S, indicating that it is a term specifically defined in the contract. Here "the Service" is defined as "the meet.jit.si service, including related software applications". If that's not vague enough, article 2 gives 8x8 the right to change, modify, etc. the Service at any time without any notice. The guys at 8x8 may be well intentioned, but their lawyers have done their best to not give the customer any basis to sue the company in any foreseeable circumstances. That is what company lawyers do, for better or worse. Regardless, it appears that at present time jitsi is not including AI training in their service, and there is no explicit carve-out in their terms for AI training. However, by article 2 they do have the right to store user content, which might become a problem in the future.

gnicholas 3y ago

> solely for the limited purpose of operating and enabling the Service to work as intended for You and for no other purposes. To me (a former corporate lawyer) the "for You" qualifier would limit their ability to use content to train an AI for use by anyone other than "You". Is there an argument? Yes. But by that argument, they would also be allowed to "publicly perform" my videoconf calls for some flimsy reasons that don't directly benefit me.

zeusk 3y ago
it isn't for you solely/exclusively. If it "improves" the service for everyone - that includes "you".
- gnicholas 3y ago
  Yep, I acknowledge that is a possibility, but it would also lead to them having permission to display literally the entirety of my videonconf calls to anyone, for advertising purposes or some other purpose that only incidentally benefits me. That would be a strained reading IMO.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - Guvante 3y ago
    Additionally courts consider the fact that users have little if any say in the terms and thus tend to take the most restrictive but still reasonable view of any uncertainty in the terms. Basically "if you wanted it you could have asked for it, if you didn't then that is a problem".
    - gnicholas 3y ago
      Yep, contracts of adhesion, and construing against the drafter: both favor the user here.
  - turbojerry 3y ago

r2b2 3y ago

Jitsi App Privacy: → https://apps.apple.com/us/app/jitsi-meet/id1165103905 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/jitsi-meet/id1165103905 And Zoom: → https://apps.apple.com/us/app/id546505307 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/id546505307 Looks like one company likes to gobble data more than the other even if both privacy policies are gobble-open.