Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Global Piracy and Strategic Responses

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Understanding and Profiting from Intellectual Property in International Business

  • 418 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter examines piracy and the possible corporate strategies against it. First, it explains how IP can lose its market value due to obsolescence, imitation, or infringement. Second, I discuss piracy as a concept and a typology with ever-increasing activities. Third, the chapter details the impact of piracy on the key stakeholders: countries, companies, and consumers. Next, it explores a combination of reasons derived from political economy, culture, businesses, and consumers to explain the causes behind the prevalence of piracy. Finally, it recommends corporate actions and appeals to external assistance for the prevention, cure, and alleviation of piracy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    An innocent defense lies in the validity of the claim: for example, the copyright claim is not included in the infringed work; compensation is made to the defendant once the validity of innocence is established based on evidence.

  2. 2.

    Bright Tunes Music Corp. v. Harrisongs Music, 420 F. Supp. 177 (SDNY 1976).

  3. 3.

    Anon. (2004) Jail for Passport Factory Pair, BBC, 27 February.

  4. 4.

    The New Oxford Dictionary of English (2001), edited by Pearson, J., Oxford: Oxford University Press: 418, 1411.

  5. 5.

    Ibid.

  6. 6.

    See (1) Idris, K. (2007) Opening Address to the Third Global Congress on Combating Counterfeiting and Piracy, Geneva, 30–31 January; (2) www.wipo.org; and (3) http://www.ccapcongress.net/index.htm.

  7. 7.

    Anon. (1998) Contribution of the Software Industry to the Chinese Economy, PricewaterhouseCoopers, Commissioned by the Business Software Alliance, London: PricewaterhouseCoopers.

  8. 8.

    See also Balfour, F. (2005) Fakes, BusinessWeek: 44–51.

  9. 9.

    WHO (2006) WHO Goes Online to Fight Fake Drugs, available at http://www.wpro.who.int/media_centre/press_releases/pr_20050503.htm, accessed on 4 May 2007.

  10. 10.

    Anon. (2004) Fake Milk Kills 13 Babies in China, Managing IP, 25 April.

  11. 11.

    Anon. (2003) Imitating Property is Theft, The Economist, 15 May: 69–71.

  12. 12.

    Holdsworth, N. (2007) Russia Beefs up Penalties for Piracy, Reuters, UK, 13 April, available at www.reuters.com, on 14 April 2007.

  13. 13.

    Kroeger, A. (2007) MEPS Discuss EU-wide Piracy Law, BBC, available at www.news.bbc.co.uk, accessed on 27 February 2007.

  14. 14.

    Anon. (2003) In Praise of the Real Thing, The Economist, 17 May, 367 (8324): 12.

  15. 15.

    The figures were obtained from the research papers published at www.bsa.gov, accessed 20 October 2007.

References

  • Al-Jabri, I., & Abdul-Gader, A. (1997). Software Copyright Infringements: An Exploratory Study of the Effects of Individual and Peer Beliefs, OMEGA. International Journal of Management Science, 25(3), 335–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bebchuk, L. A. (1984). Litigation and Settlement under Imperfect Information. Rand Journal of Economics, 15(3), 404–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bian, X., & Veloutsou, C. (2007). Consumers’ Attitudes Regarding Non-Deceptive Counterfeit Brands in the UK and China. The Journal of Brand Management, 14(3), 211–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloch, P. H., Bush, R. F., & Campbell, L. (1993). Consumer ‘Accomplices’ in Product Counterfeiting: A Demand-Side Investigation. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 10(4), 27–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bosworth, D., & Yang, D. (2006). Conceptual Issues of Global Counterfeiting on Products and Services. Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11(1), 15–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, A. E. (1996). How Effective Are International Copyright Conventions in the Music Industry? Journal of Cultural Economics, 20(1), 51–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delener, N. (2000). International Counterfeit Marketing: Success without Risk. Review of World Business, 21(1/2), 16–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gentry, J. W., Putrevu, S., & Shultz, C. J. (2006). The Effects of Counterfeiting on Consumer Search. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 5(3), 245–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ginarte, J. C., & Park, W. G. (1997). Determinant of Patent Rights: A Cross National Study. Research Policy, 26(3), 283–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, M. (1988). A New Way to Combat Product Counterfeiting. Business Horizons, 31(4), 19–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins, D. M., Kontnik, L. T., & Turnage, M. T. (2004). Counterfeiting Exposed: Protecting your Brand and Customers. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husted, B. W. (2000). The Impact of National Culture on Software Piracy. Journal of Business Ethics, 26(3), 197–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuanpoth, J. (2002). The Political Economy of the TRIPS Agreement: Lessons from Asian Countries, Multi-Stakeholder Dialogue on Trade, Intellectual Property and Biological Resources in Asia, Rajendrapur: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development, 19–21 April.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lybecker, K. M. (2007). Rx Roulette: Combating Counterfeit Pharmaceuticals in Developing Nations. Managerial and Decision Economics, 28(4–5), 509–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marron, D. B., & Steel, D. G. (2000). Which Countries Protect Intellectual Property? The Case of Software Piracy. Economic Inquiry, 38(2), 159–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matos, C. A. D., Ituassu, C. T., & Rossi, C. A. V. (2007). Consumer Attitudes Toward Counterfeits: A Review and Extension. The Journal of Consumer Marketing, 24(1), 36–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nill, A., & Shultz, C. J. (1996). The Scourge of Global Counterfeiting: Ethical Consumer Decision Making and a Demand Side Solution. Business Horizons, 39(6), 37–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2007). The Economic Impact of Counterfeiting and Piracy. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, K. (2005). Counterfeiting and Piracy Project: Measuring the Magnitude, Scope and Effects of Counterfeiting and Piracy, Counterfeiting and Piracy: WIPO/OECD Expert Meeting on Measurement and Statistical Issues, Geneva: WIPO, 17–18 November.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, J. E., & Granzin, K. (1993). Using Channel Constructs to Explain Dealers’ Willingness to Help Manufacturers Combat Counterfeiting. Journal of Business Research, 27(2), 147–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • P’ ng, I. (1983). Strategic Behaviour in Suit, Settlement and Trial. Bell Journal of Economics, 14(2), 539–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Priest, G., & Klein, B. (1984). The Selection of Disputes for Litigation. Journal of Legal Studies, 13, 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Primo-Carpenter, J., & Mcginnis, M. (2007). Matrix of Drug Quality Reports in USAID-Assisted Countries by the U.S. Pharmacopeia Drug Quality and Information Program. Washington DC: US Agency for International Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pugatch, M. P. (2004). The International Political Economy of Intellectual Property Rights. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ronkainen, I. A., & Guerrero-Cusumano, J. L. (2001). Correlates of Intellectual Property Violation. Multinational Business Review, 9(1), 59–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schweizer, U. (1989). Litigation and Settlement under Two-Sided Incomplete Information. Review of Economic Studies, 56, 163–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shore, B., Venkatachalam, A. R., Solorzano, E., Burn, J. M., Hassan, S. Z., & Janczewski, L. J. (2001). Softlifting and Piracy: Behaviour across Cultures. Technology in Society, 23(4), 563–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shultz, C. J., & Saporito, B. (1996). Protecting Intellectual Property: Strategies and Recommendations to Deter Counterfeiting and Brand Piracy in Global Markets. Columbia Journal of World Business, 31(1), 18–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simone, J. T. (2002). Anti-Counterfeiting in the PRC: Update on Criminal, Civil and Administrative Enforcement, China Law & Practice, 22–28 May.

    Google Scholar 

  • Somaya, D. (2003). Strategic Determinants of Decisions Not to Settle Patent Litigation. Strategic Management Journal, 24(1), 17–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spier, K., & Spulber, D. (1993). Suit Settlement and Trial: A Theoretical Analysis under Alternative Methods for the Allocation of Legal Costs. Journal of Legal Studies, 11, 55–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Traphagan, M., & Griffith, A. (1998). Software Piracy and Global Competitiveness: Report on Global Software Piracy. International Review of Law Computers & Technology, 12(3), 431–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Wijk, J. (2002). Dealing with Piracy: Intellectual Asset Management in Music and Software. European Management Journal, 20(6), 689–698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, D. (2005). Culture Matters to Multinationals’ Intellectual Property Businesses. Journal of World Business, 40(3), 281–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, D., & Fryxell, G. (2007). Anti-Counterfeiting Success, Brand Positioning and Consumer Discrimination of Fakes, AOM Annual Meeting 2007: Doing Well by Doing Good, Philadelphia: Academy of Management, 3–8 August.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, D., Fryxell, G., & Sie, K. Y. (2008). Anti-Piracy Effectiveness and Managerial Confidence: Insights from Multinationals in China. Journal of World Business, 43(3), 321–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, D., & Sonmez, M. (2005). Intangible Balls. Business Strategy Review, 16(2), 38–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, D., & Sonmez, M. (2007). Economic and Cultural Impact on Intellectual Property Violations: A Study of Software Piracy. Journal of World Trade, 41(4), 731–750.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, D., Sonmez, M., & Bosworth, D. (2004). Intellectual Property Abuses: How Should Multinationals Respond? Long Range Planning, 37(5), 459–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, P. K. (2001). Piracy, Prejudice, and Perspectives: An Attempt to Use Shakespeare to Reconfigure the US–China Intellectual Property Debate, Boston University International Law Journal, Spring. Retrieved April, 2006, from http://ssrn.com/abstract=262530.

  • Zheng, C., Dong, B., Cheng, Y., Chen, M., & Sun, Y. (1995). Case Analysis of IP Law. Beijing: Law Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Business, Trinity University, San Antonio, TX, USA

    Deli Yang

Authors
  1. Deli Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Deli Yang .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Yang, D. (2021). Global Piracy and Strategic Responses. In: Understanding and Profiting from Intellectual Property in International Business. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54034-0_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation