Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: VidStudio, a browser based video editor that doesn't upload your files

vidstudio.app

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 120 posts

Re: Show HN: VidStudio, a browser based video editor that doesn't upload your files

#31

Post by mghackerlady »

prhn wrote: post #7
elpocko wrote: post #2

> FFmpeg compiled to WebAssembly handles final encode FFmpeg's license is the LGPL 2.1. VidStudio looks like closed source software, I couldn't see any indication that it's free software. You're distributing this software to run in the client's browser. I'm not a lawyer but I think you're in breach of the terms of the LGPL. https://www.ffmpeg.org/legal.html

Closed source is fine, but there are a few other things that are required of LGPL, some of which are - Provide links to the source of the version of ffmpeg you used in your code - User should be able to replace the ffmpeg libs with his own compatible builds if you're using dynamically linked libs. For statically linked libs, you need to provide the tools to re-link against a compatible build. I went through an LGPL r…

I knew about the soft copyleft (the source code requirements) but didn't know there was the requirement to have libs be replaceable. Now I want to know how useful that would be in reverse engineering closed systems (particularly nintendos, since I've always had an interest in the homebrew scene there)

Re: Show HN: VidStudio, a browser based video editor that doesn't upload your files

#32

Post by Mashimo »

kolx wrote: post #25
freedomben wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any reason not to just open source it? Personally I'd love to hack on it :-) IANAL, but IMHO AGPL would be a good fit here as it complies with LGPL and also ensures nobody besides you (the copyright holder) can stand it up for profit without contributing back).

I never maintained an open source project and not sure how to even do it properly. I am also not sure how much effort would I have to put to an open source project. I imagine I would need to collaborate with a pretty much anyone who has an interest in the area. Again not that I mind just not sure how much time I have to spare. Right now this is a really slow process and tbh I have to rely on manual testing at least f…

Nah, besides sharing the code you don't have to do anything.

Most people would want you to upload the code to github, then they can star and clone it with ease. But you don't have to have an issue tracker, and you certainly don't have to read any of the issues or pull request. You can ignore or disable that.

I think even just having a up to date .zip with all the code would be technically enough.

Re: Show HN: VidStudio, a browser based video editor that doesn't upload your files

#33

Post by kolx »

CodesInChaos wrote: post #9
elpocko wrote: post #2

> FFmpeg compiled to WebAssembly handles final encode FFmpeg's license is the LGPL 2.1. VidStudio looks like closed source software, I couldn't see any indication that it's free software. You're distributing this software to run in the client's browser. I'm not a lawyer but I think you're in breach of the terms of the LGPL. https://www.ffmpeg.org/legal.html

It should be possible to comply with LGPL without publishing the source code of the whole application. Either by running the application and ffmpeg in different isolates (wasm processes), or by offering a way to merge (link) the wasm code of the closed-source application with a user compiled FFmpeg wasm build. Different isolates might even be enough to satisfy GPL, similar to how you can invoke FFmpeg as a command li…

Thanks for sharing. Will look into it

Re: Show HN: VidStudio, a browser based video editor that doesn't upload your files

#34

Post by randomtoast »

netdevphoenix wrote: post #16
freedomben wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any reason not to just open source it? Personally I'd love to hack on it :-) IANAL, but IMHO AGPL would be a good fit here as it complies with LGPL and also ensures nobody besides you (the copyright holder) can stand it up for profit without contributing back).

> Any reason not to just open source it? Mmmm...potential commercialisation? Always find it curious that people expect to get source code for free in ways that they don't do for other work (ask George Martin to release his drafts and notes).

Is open source and commercialisation an exclusive or?

Re: Show HN: VidStudio, a browser based video editor that doesn't upload your files

#35

Post by senko »

elpocko wrote: post #8
senko wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LGPL permits that. However, some popular codecs use GPL, which, if enabled, would require to distribute the rest of the code under it as well.

LGPL permits you to distribute binaries, but you can't distribute the software as an opaque binary blob with no reasonable way to modify it. What even is the equivalent of a shared library that a user can replace when software runs in the browser? Anyway, OP doesn't do most of the things FFmpeg lists under their "License Compliance Checklist".

Not disagreeing with you, but cases like these really highlight how (L)GPL can nudge vendors into doing more closed solutions with greater lock-in.

For example, we're complaining about a licensing issue for an app that can run locally (in your browser, no uploads needed). The licensing issues can easily be side-stepped by the the developer if they chose instead to do all the media manipulation in the backend.

In the end, for the user this means they have to upload & trust a random service with their data, potentially can't get raw data out, and other negative side-effects of lock in.

Re: Show HN: VidStudio, a browser based video editor that doesn't upload your files

#36

Post by mghackerlady »

netdevphoenix wrote: post #16
freedomben wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any reason not to just open source it? Personally I'd love to hack on it :-) IANAL, but IMHO AGPL would be a good fit here as it complies with LGPL and also ensures nobody besides you (the copyright holder) can stand it up for profit without contributing back).

> Any reason not to just open source it? Mmmm...potential commercialisation? Always find it curious that people expect to get source code for free in ways that they don't do for other work (ask George Martin to release his drafts and notes).

The problem is you can commercialise free software if you're creative about it. RMS made a decent amount of money working on emacs, redhat and SUSE exist, google has managed to commercialise chromium

Re: Show HN: VidStudio, a browser based video editor that doesn't upload your files

#39

Post by jmaw »

kolx wrote: post #12
elpocko wrote: post #2

> FFmpeg compiled to WebAssembly handles final encode FFmpeg's license is the LGPL 2.1. VidStudio looks like closed source software, I couldn't see any indication that it's free software. You're distributing this software to run in the client's browser. I'm not a lawyer but I think you're in breach of the terms of the LGPL. https://www.ffmpeg.org/legal.html

Thank you for pointing this out, to be completely honest, I did not consider licensing because the website started as a collection of tools I built to run locally and get into video/audio codecs then I realised it is already a decent collection of tools that other people might want to use too. But I will be making the needed changes to comply fully tonight. At least I comply with this: `Do not misspell FFmpeg (two ca…

You should look into how other companies and tools that use FFMPEG handle this situation.

I wonder if you can keep your application itself closed source, but make an open-source adapter that handles the interaction with FFMPEG.

I'm not super familiar with open source licensing, and IANAL, so make sure to do your own research :)

As an example, I believe Audacity required me to install ffmpeg manually myself, and add it to my path. This is slightly different since Audacity itself is also open source. But could be helpful to reference.

Re: Show HN: VidStudio, a browser based video editor that doesn't upload your files

#40

Post by kolx »

jamiehugo30 wrote: post #37

Curious how you're handling the MP4 export entirely client-side — are you using FFmpeg compiled to WebAssembly, or something custom built around the WebCodecs API?

So FFmpeg is part of the website in general but it is not used in the editor itself. I did built on top of the Video Codec APIs and ofc a muxer library like mp4box.js
Post reply on HN