Talk:OBS Studio

Notability
Notability concerns please see http://www.pcgamer.com/2012/12/04/how-to-set-up-open-broadcaster-a-free-lightweight-livestreaming-application/ This software is the only open source streaming software used in the gaming community and is quickly becoming popular. Voxletum (talk | contribs) 08:15, 2 June 2013

Reviews
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2047105/share-snapshot-and-stream-your-games-with-these-7-tools.html http://www.pcgamer.com/how-to-set-up-open-broadcaster-a-free-lightweight-livestreaming-application/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:983:58DF:1:792A:1A99:9EA0:C4E6 (talk) 20:50, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

How to handle OBS Studio
OBS Studio has become the preferred version of OBS as the "Classic" version which the page mostly refers to is no longer under development. This raises the question of what to do with the content on this page - either replace it with Studio related content and keep Classic as part of the history, or start a new OBS Studio page. 2001:470:1F15:D55:4C36:1E88:C5C1:B880 (talk) 00:13, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Among other things is the link to the repository. It links to the classic version, even though there is a link to the OBS-studio version. Shouldn't the link be updated (among other things)? Link in question: https://github.com/jp9000/obs-studio Fmpgri (talk) 10:50, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Currently "OBS Studio" redirects to this page and I think the best path is to update this page to use the OBS Studio name where appropriate. The reality is that people also just talk about OBS Studio as "OBS", as that is both historical and just easier to say. I started this today with a few edits, but more editing could be done on this. The page also does need better sources before too much work is done to the text. Currently many point to the OBS website. - Dyork (talk) 09:06, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

StreamLabs OBS controversy
I don't know how recently SLOBS was released, but this seems to be something notable; I was looking on the Wikipedia page specifically for information about the controversy. https://twitter.com/OBSProject/status/1460782968633499651 — SirYodaJedi (talk) 07:39, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Someone added this to the Streamlabs page, I cleaned it up and replaced primary sourcing with an MSN news report. Someone else has also removed the Streamlabs section on this page today, looking at the history it appears it keeps being removed then re-added again. As one of the complaints from OBS Studio's developers is that Streamlabs aims to give the false impression that OBS Studio and Streamlabs are partnered, having a section and software infobox on this page dedicated to Streamlabs' fork of OBS seems redundant and plays into what appears to be Streamlabs' agenda. Streamlabs has their own page and their own software infobox there, that should be enough. 137.254.7.168 (talk) 11:01, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * It was I who created the "Streamlabs OBS" section in this article. To be accurate, I merged the entire Streamlabs article here, keeping only what was necessary for completeness of the topic.
 * The Streamlabs PR, however, restored that article. I didn't want to entangle myself with corporate shills. Waysidesc (talk) 00:31, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Please be informed of the following news that happened on 17th November:
 * The OBS Studio team publically called out that they do not agree with Streamlabs product being called "Streamlabs OBS" as it causes serious confusion, to the point that users of Streamlabs OBS will use the support channels of OBS Studio to demand refunds for Streamlabs OBS. The two projects are not affiliated.
 * In response to the calling-out, Streamlabs renamed their "Streamlabs OBS" product to just "Streamlabs".
 * Reverting back to your own last version from 8th November fails to address either of these now notable concerns. This is independent of whether there is a Streamlabs page or not.
 * Someone publically discussing this news said "OBS Studio’s Wikipedia page has a very confusing section talking about StreamLabs OBS" and I completely agree. Having a whole section and software infobox for Streamlabs OBS on the OBS Studio page gives undue weight to the fork, and because it doesn't say otherwise, implies some link between the two product. They share code, but Streamlabs is not developed or supported by the OBS Studio team. That needs to be clear.
 * If Streamlabs is to be mentioned on this page at all, I think it is sufficient to mention that it exists, without undue prominence, and to be clear that it is not affiliated to OBS Studio. I don't think it needs its own section and infobox. If a moron in a hurry looks up this page, sees "Streamlabs OBS" in the table of contents, then closes the page without reading any more words, thinking OBS Studio and Streamlabs are the same product, we have failed that user. Please consider this, along with the news since 17th November, before reverting again. 148.87.23.4 (talk) 02:24, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * The section now reflects the name change and refers to the naming dispute without taking sides with either of the two groups. Of course, you could have as easily done what I did, but I guess you were too busy hating Streamlabs and coming up with the most hurtful way of painting them as the devil incarnate.
 * Wikipedia is not a battlefield and we don't take side with either of the belligerents in this ugly, childish dispute. Waysidesc (talk) 03:21, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Alright. I'm outta here. It is customary to say, "do whatever you like," but the truth is that I don't endorse people doing whatever they like. Waysidesc (talk) 08:10, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * The original author appears to desire their pet edit to exist, despite how it is clearly irregular across wikipedia. There are no sections like the Steamlabs Desktop section on any other popular and highly forked software pages I can find. No libav section on FFMPEG. No Ubuntu section on Debian. No Cinnamon section on GNOME. Clearly the OBS page and the author's original edit are irregular here. It seems the most popular way to display derivative works is with a Forks with a textual list/description/link to the derivative software's page. The author even states that they merged the entire separate software's page into the OBS Studio page, this seems entirely irregular on wikipedia as separate software always has separate pages even if it is listed in a forks/derivative works section. I think it is obvious that the main program being distributed by a company sold for 100m USD is worthy of its own article if things like GOM_Player have reached the status of worthy of an article and this information can be moved there. I fail to see a justification of this section in the OBS Studio article but perhaps the author or any other proponent can provide some. 73.15.254.52 (talk) 15:47, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

About "Streamlabs Desktop" section
The way Streamlabs Desktop section is written is undue for this page, since that section sounds like Streamlabs Desktop is a product of OBS Project, which just recently changed a name. That is the opposite to the sources provided, which state that Streamlabs company copied OBS Project code and then asked for permission to use OBS name, then used it anyway despite being informally forbidden to do so. I believe there should be less information about Streamlabs the company and more about OBS name and trademark dispute. Anton.bersh (talk) 12:48, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm inclined to agree, the entire section feels and reads like an advert for their service Greebowarrior (talk) 05:08, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Tiktok software copy
I heard of a piece of software released by tiktok that is a direct copy of OBS Studio that does not have public source code, voiding it's GPL licence. A section about this controversy would be a great addition to the article. beepborp (talk) 17:23, 13 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Added. The software was made unavailable pretty soon afterwards, but I couldn't find a reliable source that happened to say that.213.31.88.92 (talk) 20:07, 14 March 2022 (UTC)