About Intellectual Property IP Training IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars World IP Day WIPO Magazine Raising Awareness Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Enforcement Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO ALERT Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight

IP Outreach Research > IP Crime

Reference

Title: Counterfeit Products: Can Consumers identify the Fakes?
Author: J Robert Field and Blaise J Bergiel [Nicholls State University], Erich B Bergiel [University of West Georgia], Phillip W Balsmeier [Centenary College of Louisiana]
Source:

Competition Forum 6, no. 2: 280-286

Year: 2008

Details

Subject/Type: Counterfeiting
Focus: Brands (deceptive counterfeits), Fashion Accessories, Watches
Country/Territory: Canada
Objective: To find out whether and to what extent consumers can tell the difference between genuine and counterfeit goods.
Sample: 106 students from a small university in northern Ontario
Methodology: Self-administered paper and pencil survey, experiment where students were presented a set of counterfeit and genuine products

Main Findings

Two in three Canadian consumers have either consciously or inadvertently purchased counterfeit merchandise: 47.2% of respondents reported having knowingly bought a counterfeit product; and 18.9% had purchased a counterfeit believing it to be the genuine article. 64.2% would knowingly purchase a fake in the future.

Respondents were better able to differentiate between genuine and fake watches than between genuine and fake sunglasses. 88% managed to correctly differentiate the genuine watch from the two counterfeit versions. However, just 57.1% were able to correctly identify the genuine sunglasses from the two fake versions. Purchase intentions for counterfeit watches and sunglasses were higher than purchase intentions for genuine ones.

According to the authors, manufacturers affected by counterfeiting should consider a joint advertising campaign with the IACC or WTO. Rather than focusing on one specific brand or product, they should warn consumers to be on the lookout for fakes and tell them how to spot them. Furthermore, consumers should be made aware of the social (not a victimless crime; supports various criminal activities; hurts genuine manufacturers) and personal consequences (performance and financial losses to consumer; in extreme cases physical injury, even death) of purchasing counterfeits.

[Date Added: Dec 5, 2008 ]