Fact Check: Is Obsidian open source?

Is Obsidian Open Source?

Introduction

The claim in question is whether Obsidian, a popular note-taking and knowledge management application, is open source. This inquiry is significant as it touches on issues of software accessibility, user control, and community involvement in development.

What We Know

Obsidian is a markdown-based note-taking application that allows users to create a personal knowledge base. It is available on multiple platforms, including iOS, Android, macOS, Windows, and Linux [2][4]. The official website states that Obsidian features an open API and supports thousands of plugins, which allows users to customize their experience [1]. However, the term "open API" does not necessarily imply that the entire software is open source.

According to the Obsidian Help page, while users can access and modify their markdown files, the core application itself is not released under an open-source license [6]. This distinction is crucial, as it means that while users can extend the functionality of Obsidian through plugins, the underlying code of the application remains proprietary.

Analysis

The primary source of information regarding Obsidian's licensing and openness is its official website and help documentation. The website emphasizes the customization options available through plugins and the open API, which may lead some to mistakenly interpret this as an indication that Obsidian itself is open source. However, the lack of a clear statement regarding the software's licensing on the main page raises questions about transparency.

Source Reliability: The official Obsidian website [1] is the most authoritative source on the software, as it is maintained by the developers. However, it is essential to recognize that this source may have a promotional bias, as it aims to attract users to the platform.
Community Perspectives: Discussions on forums and community platforms such as Reddit or GitHub may provide additional insights into user experiences and perceptions about Obsidian's openness. However, these sources often contain opinions that may not be factually grounded or could reflect personal biases.
Conflicts of Interest: The developers of Obsidian may have a vested interest in portraying their software in a favorable light, which could influence how they present information about its features and licensing.
Methodology: To better understand the claim, it would be beneficial to examine the licensing agreements associated with Obsidian and compare them to other software that is explicitly open source. This could involve looking at the specific terms of use, the nature of the API, and the community's involvement in plugin development.
Additional Information Needed: A clearer understanding of the licensing terms and the extent of the community's ability to contribute to the software would provide a more comprehensive picture. Furthermore, insights from independent reviews or analyses of Obsidian's architecture could clarify its standing in the open-source community.

Conclusion

Verdict: False

The claim that Obsidian is open source is false. The evidence indicates that while Obsidian offers an open API and supports plugins, the core application itself is not released under an open-source license. This distinction is critical, as it means that users do not have access to the underlying code of the application, which is a fundamental characteristic of open-source software.

It is important to note that the term "open API" can create confusion, leading some to believe that the software is open source when it is not. The reliance on the official website as a primary source of information, while authoritative, may also introduce bias, as the developers have a vested interest in promoting the software positively.

However, there are limitations to the available evidence. The analysis primarily draws from the official documentation and community discussions, which may not fully capture the nuances of user experiences or the broader context of software licensing. Further independent evaluations of Obsidian's architecture and licensing agreements could provide additional clarity.

Readers are encouraged to critically evaluate information regarding software licensing and openness, as understanding these distinctions is vital for making informed choices about the tools they use.