original: For example, a shop might give away its stock in its promotion, but producing these goods would still have required the use of scarce resources, so this would not be a free good in an economic sense.
simplifications: If i shop gives away it's goods for an advertisement, but making them uses rare resources, it would not be a free good according to economics. If a shop gives away its products for free as promotion, their production still requires resources, so this is not free in an economic sense. A shop might give away things as a promotion but producing these goods would require resources. So, they would not be classified as free goods. For example, a shop might give away products in its promotion. However, these goods still require scarce resources. As a result, this would not be a free good in an economic sense. For example, a shop might give away its stock in its promotion. Making these goods would still use scarce resources, so this would not be a free good in an economic way. A shop could give away items for free as part of a promotion. But it takes resources to produce the extra goods so the items are not free in an economic sense. For example, a shop might give away its stock in its promotion. Producing these goods would still have required the use of scarce resources. This would not be a free good in an economic sense. An example might be a shop gives away its stock in marketing, but making the units would have required the use of hard to find items, so this wouldn't be a "free good" in fiscal sense. For example, a shop might give away its stock in its promotion, but producing those goods would still require the use of scarce resources, so this would not be a free commodity in an economic sense. A shop may give away stocks in its promotion,  but making these goods would still require the use of limited resources, so this would not be a free good in a economic term.