黃譯禾

摘 要：由于假冒市場的秘密性質(zhì)（關(guān)于其生產(chǎn)，運(yùn)輸和消費），對這一問題的透徹了解是具有挑戰(zhàn)性的等?，F(xiàn)有的研究發(fā)現(xiàn)在以下事實上基本一致：“在大多數(shù)情況下，（假冒的）負(fù)面影響遠(yuǎn)大于到目前為止的積極影響”。

關(guān)鍵詞：生產(chǎn);運(yùn)輸;消費;挑戰(zhàn)性;假冒;商品;文學(xué);評論

First and foremost，with the trading of counterfeits on substantial scales，brands are likely to lose out on revenues as consumers have the alternative to purchase duplicates at lower prices（Montoro-Pons and Cuadrado-Garcia，2006）.Chaudhry et al.（2009）presented an example of this problem when they described how Heelys Inc.（an American company manufacturing popular sneakers with wheels incorporated in the heel）needed to fight off Chinese and Korean counterfeits through legal procedures.This unfortunately was not an isolated incident as the volume of counterfeiting activities is vast.In 2006 the US government gave a figure of USD 500 billion as the global market value of counterfeit industry，which grew by 1700 per cent over the ten years prior to that（US Department of State，2006）.

On the other hand，it has been claimed that the existence of substandard counterfeits that intimate authentic products can ‘diminish the level of quality associated with a product or company;while at the same time a large quantity of low-cost counterfeits could contribute to a reduced sense of exclusiveness of certain luxury goods（Wilke and Zaichkowsky，1999）.Interestingly however，Nia and Zaichkowsky（2000）carried out a survey to reveal that the majority of their respondents thought that ‘the value，satisfaction and status of original luxury brand names were not decreased by the wide availability of counterfeits. Also，these respondents claimed that their intentions to buy original luxury goods were not negatively affected by the availability of counterfeits.At the same time，Barnett（2005）gave the conclusion that firms can in fact benefit from counterfeits in form of increased brand awareness as well as extra demand for their authentic products.

Few studies are focused on the motivations and detailed mechanism to sell counterfeits（Staake et al.，2009）yet there is plenty research findings on the determinants for consumers to purchase these products.Dominant factors that encourage/promote purchasing of counterfeits are，according to a studies by Gentry et al.（2006），significantly lower prices，low investment risks when buying，as well as the fact that fashion products traditionally are being quickly and constantly replaced.Their study also revealed a fascinating behavior among Western consumers as they claimed to be having fun showing purchased counterfeit products to their friends;on the contrary，the Chinese would be embarrassed if their counterfeits purchase to be exposed—which in some degree deter their decisions to buy counterfeit products.In their 1995 study，Wee et al.discovered that non-price determinants on consumers intentions to buy counterfeit products are very much depending on what the products are.As a result they failed to generalize the issue.However other authors managed to highlight some such determinants（other than the cheaper price）：access to quicker delivery（Bryce and Rutter，2005），whether or not others present is also purchasing（counterfeit products）（Albers-Miller，1999）and consumers perception of buying counterfeit products regarding the illegalness of the activity（Cordell et al.，1996）.

The author had been particularly impressed by Chows 2003 report on the involvement of organized crime and local government protectionism in the Chinese counterfeit market.Chow gave a rather detailed account of how in China criminal organizations aid to manufacturing counterfeiting products in southeastern part of the country;while local authorities were found to be responsible for the distribution process of these goods as they consider such as helpful economic practice through ‘the imposition of light penalties which do not serve as a（sufficient）deterrent to further counterfeiting by the same offender.

The demand for anti-counterfeits strategies is rising and a number of researchers have given their opinions.In an early work，Harvey and Ronkainen（1985）identified withdrawing authentic products supply and warning to retailers as practical measures.Shultz and Saporito（1996）then proposed ‘use of high-tech labeling，‘co-opt offenders and ‘ educate stakeholders at the sources;however these were only suggested as principles rather than detailed operational proceedings.

Chaudhry et al.（2009）presented a rather quite detailed strategy for managements to effectively fight against counterfeiting（quoted from their work）：

Manage the registration of all trademarks and patents in key markets.

Establish an enforcement team to track counterfeiting activities.

Create a monitoring program to quickly funnel any information about counterfeits to a central information repository.

Develop a multi-pronged action plan with programs directed at employees，distribution channel，local law enforcement and international organizations.

Be prepared to fight counterfeiting by investigating retailers and distributors as well as manufacturing sources，pursuing injunctions，and working with local law enforcement.

Despite the promising appeal of these proposals，Hung（2003）however pointed out the harsh reality that not many firms could in fact manage to fight against the problem of counterfeiting effectively on a managerial and legal basis.In his study he used the Chinese environment as an example in which such suggested strategies only work with very limited effectiveness.He argued that this was because at the moment China on the whole is actually benefiting from product counterfeiting;and foreign companies might not expect full protection for their intellectual property until China becomes a victim of counterfeiting.This certainly correlates with findings made by Chow（2003）.