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: Economic Impact Study of Counterfeiting Indonesia and Dialogue on Regulatory Remedies
Author: LPEM University of Indonesia and Masyarakat Indonesia Anti Pemalsuan [co-financed by the European Union]
Source:

Delegation of the European Commission to Indonesia and Brunei Darussalam
http://www.delidn.ec.europa.eu/spf/spf_3counterfeit-reportimpact.pdf

Year: 2005

Details

Subject/Type: Counterfeiting
Focus: Apparel and Shoes, Brands (deceptive counterfeits), Brands (non-deceptive counterfeits), Consumer Electronics / Electronic Equipment, Medicines and Medical Devices, Personal Care Products
Country/Territory: Indonesia
Objective: Inter alia, to examine consumer perception of counterfeits.
Sample: 257 consumers in Jakarta (150) and Surabaya (107)
Methodology: On-the-spot interviews based on a questionnaire

Main Findings

62.32% feel that they are able to distinguish between the original products they buy and counterfeits. Consumers feel less confident about their ability to spot fake medicines than about any other product. Consumers care more about the function and the price of a product than they care about its brand or whether it is fake or original. They tend to judge whether a product is counterfeit or original based on the price and quality.

Consumers of fakes are motivated by their lower price and perception of no difference in function between the fake and the original. 92.61% are willing to buy original products if the price difference with the fakes is only 20%. When the price difference is 80% only 27.63% are still willing to purchase the original. Only 22.96% claim that they will never buy counterfeit goods due to their higher quality (49.38%), satisfaction they get from an original purchase (41.98%) and the illegality of counterfeit goods (8.64%). Consumers are much more reluctant to buy counterfeit products if the products are applied to the skin or swallowed.

[Date Added: Aug 12, 2008 ]