Joho the Blog
An Entry from the Archives

The "free as in peanuts" meme is a useful one, I think (and I agree that you should probably stay out of the neologism game). We heard last week from an exec at Universal-Vivendi essentially that if any residual or secondary value is created based on a product they originally produced, they should be paid.

It's not surprising that the entertainment industry should want to be paid for residuals. But, carried over to almost any other aspect of life, the logic falls apart. Should the brick company be paid a portion of the capital gains of said executive's home when it increases in value? Should the professor be paid a portion of the student's income when the student applies the knowledge learned in the class (hey, now that's not a bad idea!)?

Creating secondary and tertiary value is what innovation is about. I wouldn't pay for peanuts in a bar either - and I would choose a bar that doesn't demand payment for the peanuts over one that does.

I don't mind the neologism so much, but in my head I'm pronouncing it "free chasing". In any case, "free as in peanuts" is a keeper.

Hey, maybe there are other bar analogies that could be useful. Like...

Bottle openers and wine screws aren't products the bar owns, but items they license. The openers' manufacturers have a right to be paid for every use, and the manufacturers have a right to be able to grant licenses on a bartender by bartender basis, and to restrict certain openers to being used for opening only certain types of bottles, e.g, Jane has a a cork screw that only opens California wines, and it can't be used by John to open Washington wines.

Interesting comments, especially the observation that you get value from the peanuts but you wouldn't pay for them if you had to. I wonder if freechasing gets you to spend more for the things you will pay for in that place. If so, and I suspect I would react that way, then there's an interesting transfer of value from the discrete itemt to the way it contributes to the overall experience.

Todd, good point. Obviously, the bar gives free peanuts because it agrees with you: I'm more likely to buy a second beer after eating a bowl of salty peanuts.

Now, how does/can that transfer to the digital world, especially for musicians who are too dead to be touring?

My favourite recent example of a kind of freechasing involved the Dixie Chicks. I wanted to buy their latest album when it came out just... well, just because. But what if I didn't actually like it. So - like any self-respecting freechaser (aconsumer) - I downloaded it. Loved it so much that - of course - I then went out and bought it. Actually tempted (if I had the money) to buy more than one copy, just... well, just because.

Wondering further, now that I've thought about it. I like the concept, but I'm wondering if the rather awkward sounding "freechase" might be replaced with a different prefix...

"Perchase", perhaps - using "per" in the same context as "permitted". Or "parchase" - as we partly pay for that which is free in the markups the bar applies to the booze anyway.