Home > Open Gov & Open Data , Open Source-Free Software , Politics > A Senigallia we talked about Open Data

A Senigallia we talked about Open Data

Saturday, November 20, 2010 I was invited to the conference Let me know organized by Informaetica and Comue of Senigallia to talk about Open Data. As many of you know, the theme of the Open Data, Open Government together with that, I am very passionate about. I, therefore, accepted with great enthusiasm the invitation addressed by Marco Scaloni to speak at the conference in Senigallia. I must say I was very impressed by the event. Very well organized (and for that I congratulate Mark and the other kids) and especially very rich in so many insights and cultural growth. I think that is the correct definition of the event as a Woodstock Open Data :)

I have personally participated in trying to identify a possible link between the ethical and legal principles governing the movements of Open Source and Free Software and principles that support the Open Data movement. I am deeply convinced that there is a very close link between the various movements and that what the Open Data can enjoy the experience and, why not, the mistakes made in the past by the movements associated with the software. What do you think?

Did you like this article? Subscribe to our newsletter to receive updates from the blog:


  1. June 15, 2011 at 17:38 | # 1

    A couple of observations with respect to the presentation of the Open Data in Senigallia.

    On slide 4, it is said that open source is born as opposed to Free Software.
    It seems to me a statement a little 'avventuarata. Personally, I have had occasion to speak with Bruce Perence. The opinion of Perence is that of a new rhetoric to place alongside that of Free Software.

    The definition of open source shown in slide 10 seems very similar to that of Free Software.

    The slide 12 would seem to suggest that the only accepted by the Free Software licenses are the GPL v.2 and v.3. This is not true. Maybe it would take less if it were written in deception "All licenses approved by the FSF."

  2. stefano
    June 15, 2011 at 18:04 | # 2

    @ Daniel donated:
    As for what was written in slide no. 4 on the "contrast" between OS and FS, the slide was deliberately provocative and has been widely explained verbally what is meant by "opposition". It seems to me excessive and out of place to speak of allegations "venture."

    The definition of OS shown in slide n. 10 is not mine, but it is taken verbatim from what is written in the pages of the website of the Open Source Initiative.

    On slide 12, the "schema" refers to licenses "created / approved" by the FSF and OSI, respectively. Not referred to at all licenses accepted by either.

    Unfortunately, the content of the slides can be misleading if you have not heard even the argument of the slides themselves. For that I thank you for giving me the opportunity to clarify.

  1. November 24, 2010 at 18:10 | # 1
  2. November 25, 2010 at 12:03 | # 2
  3. December 3, 2010 at 00:04 | # 3