[IMPORTANT] Embedding meet.jit.si in your web app will no longer be supported. Please use JaaS

News
1

UPDATE May 18, 2023: the 5 minute limit is now in effect on meet.jit.si

UPDATE May 1st, 2023: We have yet to make this change. It is likely that rather than completely disabling, we would instead only allow embedding for 5 minute sessions. We hope to finalize the process in the next ten days and appreciate everyone’s patience.

ORIGINAL ANNOUNCEMENT:

Hey all,

Please note that starting Monday, April 24, the latest meet.jit.si release will no longer allow embedding.

While we were happy to be able to offer this for free for the past years, unfortunately this is no longer possible.

We advise our users to either use the service directly or, if embedding is necessary, consider use of our Jitsi as a Service offering.

Also please accept our apologies for the abrupt termination. We have tried reaching out to many of our top consumers over the past months with the hope to prepare a smooth landing, but unfortunately never heard back.

If y’all need any help switching to JaaS, please let us know.

3 Likes
2

I want to understand the change, in that it is now a paid service from a Jitsi partner, that is correct?. I don’t understand if the integration that I had already done with jitsi meet is compatible or I have to do a new integration with your partner

3

Hello,

Yes, JaaS is a paid service. Both meet.jit.si and JaaS are fully funded and maintained by 8x8 and the core Jitsi team, so there is no change there.

The same iFrame API that works on meet.jit.si also works on JaaS, however JaaS has many more features such as, web hooks, branding, outbound telephony, server-side recordings and many others.

Use of JaaS is free up to 25 endpoints per month and then starts being paid with roughly a price of $0.33 per endpoint per month grouped in several packaged.

You can find more info on https://jaas.8x8.vc

Hope this helps,
Emil

1 Like
4
5

I’m assuming this is also going to affect the Jitsi Meet Electron app since it uses the IFrame API under the hood.

What’s the current stand on access to meet.jit.si via the Desktop app?

P.S. I just tested against beta.meet.jit.si and it looks like the Electron app is indeed also affected.

1 Like
6

Some work might be necessary to run the Electron app without an iframe, indeed.

7

I understand the decision, but perhaps it could be delayed a little

We are the developers in the Moodle plugin (Moodle plugins directory: Jitsi) and our plugin is running on over 5000 Moodle servers in schools and universities around the world. By default our plugin is configured to point to meet.jit.si and we have no way to know how many schools are using it out of the box.

If the embed mode stops working next Monday, many schools may be affected and even if we announce it today, they won’t have time to take action.

Thanks in any case for such a good project.

2 Likes
8

Hey Isaac and thanks for reaching out, that would certainly be an effect we’d like to avoid or at least mitigate.

I’d love to understand the situation better in order to figure out how best to address it. Could you please write to me on emcho@jitsi.org so we can chat directly?

9

Hello,
sad news,

can we still use https://meet.jit.si/ on the browser as a web application?

Would it have an impact on our instance installed on our local server ?

10

Yes, you can still host free meetings on meet.jit.si, you just can’t embed it as an iFrame in your application.

I don’t think so. This is just for the free instance (meet.jit.si).

2 Likes
11

In the IFrame API, we can replace meet.jit.si with meet.8x8.vc, and still have a free service with the current limitations?

12

As stated:

1 Like
13

What Freddie said is correct. You would also need an account on JaaS in order to be able to use it.

Direct embedding of 8x8.vc with no account will not be possible in the future

14

Hi Emcho,

What a very cool slick product, very impressed. New here so please direct me to best course of actions. I’ve signed upto the managed option. I am trying to plug the jitsu one of our iframes passing and having the camera and mic blocked even though i’m passing camera, microphone and hid through as allow list, even gave hid authorisation on server header code (as your boilder plate code is sent back from our server) - we are cross domain but its never usually and issue as have CORS support in there. Tearing my hair out. I look at the errors and it simply says deny when conference loads. If i use firefox and push it out of the frame into separate tab, it all starts working. Is there a trouble shooting guide. I can;'t see one in the iframe docs. i.e. common issues and what to do. I’m sure I’m not the only one to embed this within another iframe before.

kind regards

Karl

15

Dear Jitsi Team,
I am writing to express my disappointment and concern regarding the recent announcement that embedding Jitsi on websites will no longer be possible. As a long-time user of your platform, I have come to rely on the convenience and accessibility that embedding Jitsi has provided for me and many others.

I understand that the decision to discontinue this feature was due to financial constraints, but I urge you to reconsider this move. Jitsi has built a reputation as a reliable and trustworthy platform, and the decision to remove a widely-used feature in order to push users towards a paid version feels like a bait and switch. It is unfair to force individuals to use a paid version after luring them in with the promise of a free product.

Furthermore, I believe there are alternative solutions to this problem. If Jitsi has a paid tier for the Jaas, why not have a paid tier for the Embed as well? Zoom, a competitor, offers a paid tier for embedding their platform. I believe that many users, including myself, would be willing to pay a small monthly fee to retain access to this feature.

I also want to stress the importance of convenience and ease of use. In a world where AI is taking over and writing code is becoming less relevant, Jitsi’s out-of-the-box embedding system is an invaluable tool. It would be a shame to lose such a unique and valuable feature.

Lastly, I want to express my concern over the manner in which this decision was made. There is an overarching suspicion about the reasons behind this move, and it is hard to trust the brand going forward.

In conclusion, I respectfully urge you to reconsider your decision and leave the embed feature open until a better solution can be established. I, along with millions of other users, have come to rely on Jitsi for our communication needs, and I sincerely hope that you will take our concerns into consideration.

Thank you for your time and attention.
Pastor Anderson
Lighted Candle Telechurch

16

Dear @Lighted_Candle,

I’m not part of the Jitsi Team, so you can take my response with a grain of salt. But I feel like it’s important to point out how flawed your reasoning is on this issue and how unfair your accusations are.

Meetings are still free at meet.jit.si. These meetings have no restrictions, for the most part. You can host a meeting for as long as you want and as many meetings as you like. That in itself alone is worth its weight in gold. meet.jit.si continues to be used by millions worldwide, so I’m unsure of this “bait and switch” you talk about.

When you embed Jitsi through meet.jit.si on your private platform, you’re further offsetting the cost of providing videoconferencing to your users to the Jitsi Team, while presenting it as a feature on your platform. Yes, the TOS demands that you retain the logo, but let’s be real, when embedded, most people just assume it’s a feature you’re providing. And the Jitsi Team was ok with supporting this for years - for free. But resources are not unlimited and with the onset of the pandemic, there was an exponential rise in the number of users, which means even more resources are needed. Who is supposed to bear the cost of all that extra infrastructure? Most people who embed Jitsi (through meet.jit.si) in their applications make money off of it. No one ever batted an eyelid about that. But now, it’s becoming too expensive to support and they’re saying, we’re unable to foot this bill anymore. This makes all the sense in the world to me.

You STILL have options - you can host your own server, bear the cost of providing the resources and have absolute control over your environment. There are cloud hosting services that can facilitate this if you don’t want to have physical infrastructure. And you’ll STILL be using Jitsi’s proprietary solution FOR FREE. That anyone would complain about this is just bizarre to me.

So yes, while we understand that you feel upset that something you’ve been getting for free since forever will now cost you a couple of cents per endpoint to retain, I think it is awfully unfair for you to characterize the decision the way you did. You Pastor a church - I’m fairly certain you collect offerings (and possibly, tithes) from your members to support your operational costs. So, in my mind, you especially should understand this decision.

Again, you didn’t direct your missive to me, but because we all benefit tremendously from the unmatched generosity of the Jitsi Team, I feel compelled to say something.

JaaS costs just a few pennies (after you’ve exhausted the free 25 endpoints per month). This is not only fair, but extremely generous.

1 Timothy 5:18 English Standard Version 2016 (ESV)
For the Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain,” and, “The laborer deserves his wages.”

4 Likes
17

Thank you for sharing your perspective on Jitsi’s decision to discontinue the embed feature. While I appreciate your point about operational costs and the value of JaaS, I must respectfully disagree with your assessment of the situation.

As someone who has come to rely on the embed feature for both personal and professional purposes, I feel a great sense of disappointment and frustration at its sudden removal. While I certainly understand the need to cover costs and maintain sustainable operations, I believe that Jitsi’s decision to pull the rug out from under its users in this way is unfair and poorly executed.

Furthermore, while JaaS may be affordable for some users, not everyone has the financial resources to subscribe to a paid service. This is especially true for individuals and small businesses who have been hit hard by the pandemic and are already struggling to make ends meet. For these users, the loss of the embed feature is not just an inconvenience, but a real blow to their ability to connect with others and conduct business online.

I appreciate your reference to scripture, but citing a biblical verse may not be relevant or persuasive in a business context. It’s important to focus on the practical implications of the decision and suggest alternatives or solutions rather than engaging in a philosophical or religious debate.

I believe that Jitsi has a responsibility to its users to provide clear and transparent communication, and to act in good faith to maintain the features and services that it has promised to provide. As a loyal user of Jitsi, I hope that the company will reconsider its decision and work to find a solution that allows users to continue to benefit from this valuable tool.

18

Actually, you made it a religious/philosophical debate when you referenced your title and linked to your church. You seemed to be making a point and I opted to engage that point. However, if you’re saying you just want to focus on this as a business argument, then you must know that your math is not quite adding up.

I may be a bit confused about this, but you keep making mention of a “promise to provide”. It’s possible I’ve just missed this, but where exactly was it ever promised that embedding would be made available forever? Honestly, something is not adding up in how you’re processing this: you’re making an argument for businesses and their finances, yet at the same time discounting the real impact of a business offering these things free of charge to a population that’s grown exponentially in just a few short years. Surely, someone has to pay for the additional infrastructure; in your opinion, who do you suggest?

Perhaps you could argue that more lead time could have been given - that might be a fair point - but to insist that this feature must always be supported ad infinitum is not only bizarre, but suggests an astonishing degree of entitlement.

Just so we’re clear, here are some facts:

  • Hosting meetings on meet.jit.si is still free for all. Host as many meetings as you want, for as long as you want
  • Running your own Jitsi instance using the bundled code comes at no charge from the Jitsi Team, and they’ve made it very easy to accomplish this
  • JaaS is available for you if you need to offload the headache of dealing with servers to a specialized team. You even get to use JaaS for free for up to 25 endpoints (you mentioned in your previous post that a tiered arrangement is acceptable to you, I think JaaS already offers that).

To conclude, I think it is a bit unfair and supremely selfish to only consider one’s wants without taking into consideration what it’d cost someone else to satisfy those wants for free.

2 Likes
19

Please open a new discussion topic to discuss your issue and provide the JS browser console logs.

20

We have been happy to provide it for as long as it has been sustainable. JaaS shouldn’t be outrageously expensive for your use case. If you like a service, paying for it is a way to demonstrate you value it. Remember you can still use it without limits directly, only embedding will get restricted.

I think you are being unreasonable here. You can still use the product. Embedding it in your own is a different story. Yes it has been free, but it’s not sustainable, that’s the unfortunate situation. We are tying to find the compromise scenario here.

That’s exactly what JaaS is for here! With it you’ll be able to use embedding, and what’s more, you can remove the Jitsi logo and use your own, and customize the branding to better match your product. All without having to run your own infrastructure.

Yes, we made a mistake and the restriction made it into a release it shouldn’t have, hence the hasty announcement. We have since rolled it back (so embedding is now possible still) and have taken some extra steps.

We won’t keep the feature open without limits, sorry, it’s just not sustainable. Here is what we are doing:

  • Embedding will still be possible, with a time limit of 5 minutes
  • We fixed the detection code not to break Electron
  • These changes will be applied in a couple of weeks

Hope that helps.

5 Likes