Free-rider
Sebastian Mazzuca

En teoría de los juegos, el jugador que se aprovecha de la estrategia de cooperación de los demás jugadores se llama “free-rider.” En particular, “free-rider” es quien disfruta de los beneficios resultantes del esfuerzo o inversión del resto de los participantes sin aportar él mismo al producto colectivo. Un ejemplo típico esta dado por la evasión impuestos seguida del uso de los bienes públicos (escuelas, puentes, hospitales) financiados por esos impuestos. Entre las traducciones conocidas risueñamente malas se encuentra "llanero de la libertad" en la versión mexicana de “Anarquía, Estado y Utopía” de Nozick. Alternativas menos heroicas pero más sobrias como “colado,” “polizón” o “gorrón” sin duda hacen un mejor trabajo. http://www.concepts-methods.org/dictionary_allcomments.php?i...


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search
In economics and political science, free riders are actors who consume more than their fair share of a resource, or shoulder less than a fair share of the costs of its production. The free rider problem is the question of how to prevent free riding from taking place, or at least limit its negative effects.

Because the notion of "fairness" is a subject of controversy, free riding is usually only considered to be an economic "problem" when it leads to the non-production or under-production of a public good, and thus to Pareto inefficiency, or when it leads to the excessive use of a common property resource.

A common example of a free rider problem is Defense spending: No person can be excluded from being defended by a state's military forces, and thus free riders may refuse or avoid paying for being defended, even though they are still as well guarded as those who contribute to the state's efforts. Therefore, it is usual for the government to avoid relying on volunteer donations, using taxes and/or conscription instead
http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_rider_problem
The Free Rider Problem
In many contexts, all of the individual members of a group can benefit from the efforts of each member and all can benefit substantially from collective action. For example, if each of us pollutes less by paying a bit extra for our cars, we all benefit from the reduction of harmful gases in the air we breathe and even in the reduced harm to the ozone layer that protects us against exposure to carcinogenic ultraviolet radiation (although those with fair skin benefit far more from the latter than do those with dark skin). If all of us or some subgroup of us prefer the state of affairs in which we each pay this bit over the state of affairs in which we do not, then the provision of cleaner air is a collective good for us. (If it costs more than it is worth to us, then its provision is not a collective good for us.)

Unfortunately, my polluting less does not matter enough for anyone -- especially me -- to notice. Therefore, I may not contribute my share toward not fouling the atmosphere. I may be a freerider on the beneficial actions of others. This is a compelling instance of the logic of collective action, an instance of such grave import that we pass laws to regulate the behavior of individuals to force them to pollute less.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/free-rider/

Free rider
A person who chooses to receive the benefits of a "public good" or a "positive externality" without contributing to paying the costs of producing those benefits. http://www.auburn.edu/~johnspm/gloss/free_rider