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: Forget the "Real" Thing - Take the Copy! An Explanatory Model for the Volitional Purchase of Counterfeit Products
Author: Elfriede Penz and Barbara Stöttinger [Vienna University of Economics and Business Administration]
Source:

Advances in Consumer Research  32: 568-575

Year: 2005

Details

Subject/Type: Counterfeiting
Focus: Brands (non-deceptive counterfeits)
Country/Territory: Austria
Objective: To explore what drives customers to buy the fake rather than the original product.
Sample: 1040 Austrian consumers
Methodology: Questionnaire

Main Findings

The most important influence on consumer intention to buy fake products comes from perceived behavioural control: the more people think that they are able to engage in that behaviour and have the required resources (such as e.g. time, money), the more they are willing to purchase counterfeits. The perception that buying counterfeit products is "smart shopping" also considerably influences consumers' willingness to buy them.

At a price level only slightly cheaper than the original, the embarrassment potential of being detected as counterfeit user/buyer does not affect purchase intention, while social pressure does. However, at a significantly cheaper price, the embarrassment potential strongly influences the willingness to buy fakes, whereas social normative pressure only has a limited effect. Less important drivers are the attitude towards counterfeiting and the defence of counterfeiters' actions.

Thus, according to the author, communication campaigns should aim at the individual's attitudes towards the own behaviour rather than trying to influence the perception of counterfeiters.

[Date Added: Aug 12, 2008 ]