Research in the consumption of counterfeit products has examined market size, consumer perceptions, and buyer characteristics (Nia & Zaichkowsky, 2010; Wee, Tan, & Cheok, 1995). However, little is known about how different kinds of counterfeits are evaluated because the term counterfeit tends to be used as a catch all for “fakes”. By taking a more nuanced approach to defining counterfeits we investigate how consumer’s perceptions of counterfeit products can vary based on the details of the item and its production. Moreover, we demonstrate that perceptions and consumption of counterfeits is not universal across cultures. Drawing from cultural psychology research, we propose that differences in dialectical thinking styles can influence the evaluation of counterfeit products. Prior literature has demonstrated that East Asians are relatively more dialectical. While Caucasians (with European cultural background) adopt a relatively more polarized, less polarized, less dialectical belief system (Peng & Nisbett, 1999). This difference has important implications for our understanding of cultural differences in considering counterfeits. Consider, for example, a “ghost shift” Rolex watch (i.e. an unlicensed copy made in a licensed facility with authentic materials but on an unofficial third shift (Parloff, 2006); compare that with a replica made using slightly different materials in a different facility altogether. Both are classified as counterfeits but may be evaluated differently with respect to authenticity and, as a result, may differ in perceived value as well (e.g. likelihood to purchase). We investigate these issues through three experiments conducted with 406 American undergraduate students by asking them to evaluate a variety of counterfeit and ghost shift counterfeit products. The first study relies on culture (non-Asian vs. East Asian ethnicity) as a proxy for thinking style and investigates perceptions of counterfeit sunglasses and shoes. Our second study provides converging evidence for the role of thinking styles on evaluations of different types of counterfeit shoes and extends our research by moving beyond reductionist cultural explanations through a wholly non- Asian sample by measuring individual differences in dialectical reasoning (Dialectical Self Scale; Spencer-Rodgers, Boucher, Mori, Wang, & Peng, 2009). Our last study investigates counterfeit Rolex watches and, more importantly, manipulates participants’ tolerance for change and contradiction through an established priming task (Peng & Nisbett, 1999). All three experiments revealed consistent results: lower dialectical thinking (more representative of Europeans) resulted in a greater likelihood to purchase the third shift version over the replica version, while higher dialectical thinking (e.g. East-Asian) resulted in equivalent responses between the two types. In studies 2 and 3 perceived authenticity also differed for low dialectical thinkers, but not high dialectical thinkers.

Fashion design itself has an independent artistic value of its own. However, legal protection for fashion design is still lacking. In the fashion market, design piracy and trademark piracy are universal phenomena and the imitation behavior is made by a wide range of subjects in real time. The protection of the authentic holder in the relatively-short-cycled fashion design should be done immediately. Accordingly, this study aims to conduct a comparative research on the laws designed to protect fashion design significantly, to promote the creation of fashion design, and to provide implications for the future fashion design protection. The specific objectives of this study are as follows. First, we aim to examine the market trends relating to the theft of the fashion design between Republic of Korea and the United States. The second objective is to consider current legislation to protect fashion design in Republic of Korea and the United States and to analyze the differences between the two countries. Thirdly, the present study seeks to measure consumers’ perception on counterfeit in order to analyze the current status of design piracy. Our results suggest that both countries cohere in that the market size of counterfeit goods is expanding and fashion products are prominent in the counterfeits market. However, while Republic of Korea is not capable of effectively controlling domestic counterfeit products, the United States is trying to protect the intellectual property rights with regulations of counterfeits through the Customs and Border Protection Agency. In the domain of legal protection for fashion design, the United States enacted individual laws such as DPPA and IDPPA through cooperation with the fashion industry and the legal profession since 2006. On the other hand, the effectiveness of laws for fashion design protection appears to be weaker in Republic of Korea. According to the analysis of consumer perception, Korean consumers continuously buy counterfeit goods, whereas U.S. consumers rarely report having had a counterfeit product purchase experience. Korean consumers have a relatively high level of legal knowledge concerning fashion design protection and, compared to their U.S. counterparts, they are negatively recognized about counterfeit goods. Despite this, they do not hesitate to buy counterfeit products in real life. The results of our analysis of the consumer perception suggest that Korean consumers’ attitudes and purchase behaviors with regard to counterfeit goods are inconsistent; the reason underlying this tendency is that the force of the legal system is insufficient. Therefore, this study suggests to strengthen the rigor of the law-enforcement and to establish the laws that would help enhance consumer awareness in the Korean society.

The purpose of this study is to investigate which of the main social and personality factors affect the attitudes of consumers towards counterfeit products and their purchase intentions in one of largest counterfeit product market as much as the attractive one for the Global Luxury goods ,namely Turkey.