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: Purchase Intent for Fashion Counterfeit Products: Ethical Ideologies, Ethical Judgments, and Perceived Risks
Author: Sejin Ha [Ohio State University] and Sharron J Lennon [University of Delaware]
Source:

Clothing and Textiles Research Journal 24, no. 4: 297-315

Year: 2006

Details

Subject/Type: Counterfeiting
Focus: Apparel and Shoes, Brands (deceptive counterfeits), Brands (non-deceptive counterfeits)
Country/Territory: United States of America
Objective: To study factors that contribute to consumer decision making with regard to counterfeit fashion products.
Sample: 115 undergraduate students in textiles and clothing classes enrolled at a large Midwestern university (study 1); 326 undergraduate students in textiles and clothing and marketing, enrolled at a large Midwestern university (study 2)
Methodology: Questionnaires

Main Findings

STUDY 1: 52.2% of respondents have purchased at least one counterfeit fashion product, and 55.7% own fashion counterfeits. The top reasons given for purchasing fashion counterfeits were “cheap price” and “identical design to original item”.

Consumer intention to purchase counterfeit fashion products was negatively influenced by perceived risk: the higher a consumer’s general uncertainty about the consequences of purchasing a fashion fake (e.g. financial loss, functional risk, feeling ashamed, etc), the smaller the likelihood is that he/she will actually buy it.

Being idealist (believing that harming others is never appropriate and always leads to bad outcomes) or relativist (believing that absoulute or universal moral principles should be tempered by a consideration of their consequences) was not found to affect the intent to purchase counterfeit fashion products.

Overall, nonpurchasers scored higher in idealism than purchasers. Counterfeit purchasers tended to perceive less risk than nonpurchasers.



STUDY 2: 48.2% of respondents have purchased at least one counterfeit fashion product, and 48.4% own fashion counterfeits. The top reasons given for purchasing fashion counterfeits were “cheap price” and “identical design to original item”.

Consumer intention to purchase counterfeit fashion products was negatively influenced by perceived risk: the higher a consumer’s general uncertainty about the consequences of purchasing a fashion fake (e.g. financial loss, functional risk, feeling ashamed, etc), the smaller the likelihood is that he/she will actually buy it.

Being idealist (believing that harming others is never appropriate and always leads to bad outcomes) did not affect purchase intention for counterfeit fashion products. However, idealism positively influenced beliefs about moral wrongness of purchasing counterfeits.

Being relativist (believing that absoulute or universal moral principles should be tempered by a consideration of their consequences) made respondents more likely to buy counterfeit fashion products. However, relativism was not found to positively influence beliefs about moral rightness of purchasing counterfeits.

Beliefs that purchasing fashion counterfeits is morally wrong lowered purchase intention for fake fashion items.



The authors of the studies highlight the following implications and recommendations: education and public policies should emphasise critical risks of fashion counterfeiting, especially because fashion fakes do not have visible and (immediate) direct negative effects on consumers; illustrate to students that counterfeiting is not a victimless crime, that it can affect them, e.g. by stating that when goods bearing their university’s logo are counterfeited, then the income their college derives from these decreases; guest speakers and class activities/projects addressing issues of counterfeiting can also be beneficial; education about negative aspects of fakes, including how they affect the economy, society, and consumers, may be helpful to effect attitude change; public service announcements underscoring the relationship between counterfeiting and terrorism could also be effective.

[Date Added: Apr 9, 2009 ]