These two for if completing finish erroneamente being confused as synonymous, but it is interesting to detach some differences, and to analyze that of certain form these principles finish being antagonistic between itself. The beginning of the free initiative or of free enterprise it corresponds to the delimitation of the space of the economic agents, is the legal defense to the agent in undertaking what to desire without the state interference, that is, the freedom is authorized to the individual to have the company and to vender the product that more good to identify itself, the State cannot limit the choice of the entrepreneur in constituting the company that to fit to it. In the moving this it detaches Rabbit the importance of this principle to the Commercial law, For the Commercial law, two excellent aspects if conclude in the insertion of the free initiative it enters the beddings of the economic order. In first place, the constitutionality of law rules that they aim at to motivate the particular ones to the exploration of enterprise activities; in as is the duty tax to the generality of the people, to respect constitucional law the same, as well as the illegality of the acts that hinder its full exercise.
(2008; p.188-189) Already the beginning of the competition freedom it tells that the economic agent is free to undertake what she understands well since that does not harm the freedom of other economic agents to concur. The contradiction in these is perceived here two principles, therefore not if it can definiz them as synonymous. The freedom that is given in the free initiative is limited in the free competition, this when abuses on the part of the economic agents occur thus harming the freedom of others to concur, therefore the freedom is authorized to institute the company who the agent to desire, but the State has to analyze if the implementation of this will not harm the competition it enters excessively.